Budget 2017-18: should we speculate to accumulate?

Should the Treasurer's embracing of good debt have us worried?

Scott Morrison delivering Budget

The concept of good debt and bad debt is not new but should the Treasurer Scott Morrison’s sudden passionate differentiation between the two have us worried?

The Coalition has never been big on debt of any kind, preaching for years that a deficit is bad for the Budget and, in turn, bad for the economy. However, less than two weeks out from the Federal Budget 2017-18 Scott Morrison decided that good debt might not actually be so bad after all.

So what’s the difference between good debt and bad debt. Simply put, good debt is money borrowed to pay for projects such as national infrastructure programs and investment in industries that create jobs and keep the economy turning. Bad debt, on the other, hand tends to deliver no economic benefit.

It’s this good debt definition that Scott Morrison is relying on to get him out of what is likely to be a pretty bleak Budget, unless you’re a first home buyer that is. Everything is pointing to the economy slowing down. Commodity prices are falling, large building projects are coming to an end, wage growth is going backwards and the concern over rising household debt and an unsustainable housing market will undoubtedly lead to a tightening of household spending. Therefore, the Government has to look to some kind of ‘miracle’ to keep the economic wheels turning – hence the willingness to do a complete flip on the concept of good debt.

Good debt will be used to fund large-scale infrastructure projects that will, if chosen correctly, deliver a much-needed economic boost. However, there is a knack to choosing the correct projects – pink batts, school halls and the NBN projects were all worthy projects but poorly implemented and mismanaged.

Read more at ABC.net.au

Opinion: Just do something

One week out from the 2017-18 Federal Budget it’s clear that the Treasurer isn't any closer to delivering a balance sheet for 2016-17 that will make anyone smile, in fact it's likely to be worse than predicted just five months ago.

According to Deloitte Access Economics twice-yearly Budget Monitor, released today, stagnant wage and job growth has cut the revenue from personal income tax to the tune of $1.7 billion in 2016-17. This means that the budget deficit will be almost $2 billion worse than predicted at the end of last year.

However, a surge in commodity prices and low interest rates will deliver a small boost for 2017-18 to the tune of reducing the predicted deficit by $1.2 billion for the next financial year.

While everyone is expecting a financial boost from the mooted assistance for first homebuyers, the reality is if people can't afford to pay their mortgage over the next 25 or 30 years, there’s not much point in buying a house.

Scott Morrison’s predecessor Joe Hockey, was much maligned when he made the statement that the first step to affording a home was to get a well-paying job. His delivery was definitely flawed, but the principal isn’t wrong, you just have to give people the opportunity by providing such jobs.

Spending big to stimulate growth isn’t a ground-breaking move, many countries do it. With interest rates at record lows, economists have been urging the Government to do just this for many years. It remains to be seen whether Scott Morrison will have the intestinal fortitude to announce a major infrastructure spending program while the country’s budget deficit continues to grow. But the need for action is clear and sometimes it's better to be damned for doing something than ridiculed for not.

What do you think? Do you agree that there is both good debt and bad debt? Is a targeted program of infrastructure spending the best way to help the Budget and the economy? Or should we be reining in all spending?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login

    1st May 2017
    9:23am
    Cutting taxes for the wealthy doesn't feed ''good debt''. If, instead of cutting company taxes and preserving benefits for the well off, the government cut taxes for low income earners and increased welfare dramatically, the resulting spending boost might result in higher profits generating higher tax revenue and reduced unemployment, reducing the budget deficit.

    I don't trust the LNP to make wise spending decisions. Their focus is always self-interest and feeding the well off. Neither do I believe their nonsense about ''good debt''. Sure, there is such a thing, but Morrison is just waffling to save his hide because HE FAILED.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    10:32am
    Rainey low income people pay little tax or none. A family earning $60,000 gets more in welfare than they pay in tax. Only 40% of Australians pay any tax at all.

    Cutting company tax will help small business especially those effected by flooding. They are doing it tough.
    Slimmer Cat
    1st May 2017
    11:32am
    40% of all working households receive more in government benefits than they pay in taxes.
    84% of all personal income tax is collected from 20% of tax payers.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:09pm
    Those who benefit more, pay more - still doesn't leave them as poor as that 40%.

    Very socialist is your LNP... much as they try to disguise it.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:48pm
    The well off do not pay nearly enough to cover the cost of supplying the benefits they enjoy, and working people on average incomes and below pay far too much. As for company tax cuts - utter rubbish. Company profits have been skyrocketing while wages stay stagnant. The cuts will further enrich directors and senior executives, whose wages are downright obscene. They were neither needed nor justified. Those affected by flooding will claim huge insurance payouts and are also receiving special government aid packages (I know because I live in an area that was badly affected.)

    The higher income earners SHOULD pay high taxes because they are profiting from lower income earners working for far less than the value they produce so the fat cats can get wealthy. Progressive taxes were intended to balance this inequity, but the LNP and their wealthy supporters don't subscribe to social justice programs. They have neither morals nor integrity - just GREED.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:07pm
    Rubbish Rainey the well off can only eat as much as everyone else, they can only sleep in one bed, wear one set of clothes so they do not consume any more than the ordinary person. In fact they actually provide a lot more for the ordinary people that they take.
    Rae
    1st May 2017
    2:03pm
    The Accord had a social wage attached to it.Workers have kept their end of that bargain as low wages prove. It is the social wage part that those who took the profits are now refusing to honour. The Accord has made many very wealthy indeed at the expense of ordinary workers.
    Sundays
    1st May 2017
    7:17pm
    Come on OG. Wealthy people consume a lot more. More expensive food, entertainment, clothing, personal grooming, education etc.However, poor people spend a much larger percentage of their income, just to live. You seem to forget that everyone pays GST
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    10:18pm
    Sundays I wouldn't spend half of what most people spend on food, clothing, entertainment, personal grooming etc so that statement is false. Just because you earn income you do not have to spend it.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:24am
    Well - there ya go, OG - your OAP contributes 100% of income back into the economy and you hoard it thus creating a Black Hole in the Budget... no wonder we need budget repair when those with too much don't spend and keep the economy moving.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    7:36am
    Well said, Trebor. Clearly, OG is the PROBLEM here, and his greedy, self-serving 'solution' would devastate the economy as well as creating a very unhealthy society in which crime would be the only way for many to survive.
    LiveItUp
    2nd May 2017
    8:04am
    I also spend very little but I supply free housing, food etc to my housekeeper and handyman. From what OG says he has a partner and accomodates young people who need help in getting their life back in order. I'd say we both do moremore than most people for society. If that's greedy then the other 99% of the population must be extremely greedy.

    Don't forget all the excess food I grow that gets donated to the poor?
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    9:15am
    OG you are quite correct. Too many do just pay bills and spend everything else with no thought for future needs or consequences. Education programs to teach skills of budgeting, saving and investing are needed in my opinion.

    The stats show over 60% have this spending/ living on debt habit and it created huge stress in lives.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    9:27am
    I am also a very practical person and have had to be throughout my life and I never buy for the sake of it -- I was taught to save and never spend if I never had the money to pay for something -- never ever get time payment -- I did of course for my home but worked hard and paid that off.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    9:45am
    Ah, yes, Lazlo - the old 'label the rest moral degenerates' line, eh? Missed by THAT much!
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    10:28am
    Well Rae if those people you say are spending with no thought to the future someone must be benefiting, shopkeepers, jobs created and a whole range of other businesses that keep our economy going.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:07pm
    Precisely the point, Misty - an economy is a fluid thing, not a set of fixed constellations - much the same as Morrison's puerile attempt to label Social Security as some kind of 'bad' debt amongst countless other modes of spending when there are, as pointed out, many more genuine BAD debts out there from the current mode of government spending.

    Not that I expect much better from Labor - just a different ideological focus... with similar wastage to their selected groups.
    bartpcb
    1st May 2017
    10:25am
    This is truly pathetic of the Liberal party and shows their hypocrisy in a clear light. This is an transparent attempt to ward of criticism of their incompetence in handing government of a nation. When they were in opposition during the Global Financial Crisis when did they ever, ever concede this definition of debt "So what’s the difference between good debt and bad debt. Simply put, good debt is money borrowed to pay for projects such as national infrastructure programs and investment in industries that create jobs and keep the economy turning. Bad debt, on the other, hand tends to deliver no economic benefit. When the whole world was congratulating the LABOUR PARTY and JULIA GILLARD on their policies and economic ratings, the sleazy backstabbing Liberals were conning the nation about the evils of national debt, and the nation fell for it. Now these morons have more than tripled the debt, with little or nothing to show for it, they tell us it's 'good debt'. What a load of charlatans.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    10:38am
    Labor party just panicked during the GFC and we are seeing the results of that today.
    Rae
    1st May 2017
    11:59am
    Absolute nonsense OG. The LNP sold everything that produced revenue and created huge bills through tax concessions, childcare rebates, free super pensions etc, on and on.Wasteful contracts and mismanagement. This is a LNP waste of money nothing to do with Labor.

    Howard's idea to double the population in such a short time was crazy. It was always going to bankrupt the country.
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    12:28pm
    Geezer absolute RUBBISH -- if the Rudd had not done what he did we would have been up that well-known creek without a paddle -- this mob have NFI what the hell they are doing and need to get out, all they are interested in is helping out those that do not need help and lying about what jobs it will create --- when the whole time they are making jobs obsolete.
    They can spend BILLIONS on bloody defence that is well outdated but nothing to help those that built the bloody country.
    Morrison is a dangerous, NASTY religious NUT!
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:57pm
    Labor inherited massive obligations from a profligate LNP government that wasted the profits of the boom. Given the GFC, Labor managed the economy very well - surprisingly! The LNP did a very bad job under Howard and Costello and is doing a worse job now, and this ''good debt'' crap is merely to try to cover up their massive failure.
    Foxy
    1st May 2017
    1:07pm
    ....good comment PlanB - ScoMo is a 'mealy mouth' nut-job! Ugly to boot .................. lol :-)
    Renny
    1st May 2017
    1:12pm
    While i agree with just about all you say Rae, who gets free super pensions? That's a lie about public servants usually spread by the far right. I paid for my super and how I can use it is highly restricted. I have no lump sum and a small pension. Thats it. I can't borrow or use it in any other way, or leave it to my descendents.
    Rae
    1st May 2017
    2:10pm
    You are correct Renny I meant the tax free pensions in pension mode that all get, even multi millionaires. I do understand that public servants paid for their own super by paying large amounts of after tax money into compulsory funds and in most cases not even getting the 9% surcharge. It was an absolute disgrace in my opinion that the non concessional amounts are deemed to be so much lower than true amounts.

    And yes to get that pension your lump sum was handed over with no opportunity to change the decision.

    The nurses, teachers, firefighters etc that served their communities diligently should never have been treated so shabbily by the LNP.
    Jtee
    1st May 2017
    2:54pm
    Where has the "World's Greatest Treasurer" gone? Perhaps he should be found and asked how to fix the problem he and his fellow Labor party members contributed to. Payments to dead people and people living overseas.
    ex PS
    2nd May 2017
    8:28am
    The LNP won an election by slamming ALP spending by spreading the lie that there was no such thing as good debt. It has now changed its mind in order to justify its inability to substantiate its own lie.
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    9:21am
    Yes ex PS The revenue base has been pretty much destroyed. All those dividend producing public assets sold, all the poorly constructed contracts, the decimation of the public service, the out of control insurance industry and millions of new immigrants to make the GDP look good but obviously no money to provide for the infrastructure needed.

    Not that Australia is the only country in strife. The Western Nations have been damaged beyond repair by Neo liberal ideology and I doubt there will be an easy fix.

    All we can do is save for those rising costs of living, cut discretionary spending and help the young wherever we can.
    Jurassicgeek
    1st May 2017
    10:27am
    Morrison is a moron,hasn't a clue ..just a pole Turtle...
    Jurassicgeek
    1st May 2017
    10:29am
    "You know he didn't get there by himself, he doesn't belong there, he doesn't know what to do while he's up there, and you just want to help the poor stupid guy get down."
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    10:37am
    Well you lot voted him in.
    Paulodapotter
    1st May 2017
    10:53am
    Scotty is part of that religious mob that thinks accumulation of personal wealth is Godly and just, as a means unto itself. He's a trickle down Treasurer, which means of course, he's just a greedy b.....d. He'll pander to his Hillsong mob until the cash cow comes home to be milked. It's part of his DNA and nothing will change that.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:12pm
    His electorate voted him in OG - and his party made him Treasurer - god knows why since he hasn't two brain cells to rub together in a fit... I lie - he has two brain cells - they warily circle one another like two boxers trying to avoid contact in his skull.

    All he's good for is to be a mouthpiece for this dopey ideology driven government and like the good concentration camp guard he is, he doesn't question orders.....
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    12:29pm
    Geezer I never voted for the Libs or the Labour I voted for Hansen but she has also proved to be a dead loss so far
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:59pm
    I certainly didn't vote for this lying mob of fraudsters whose goal is social engineering to crush the working class and ensure the wealthy hoard all the gold.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:03pm
    I didn't vote for them either as it's simply not worth voting as the result is already known.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    9:49am
    The Minister roles are a handout from the party - not voted on by the people - and they are handouts in return for political loyalty and the absolute acceptance of the party line and the ability to absorb every bit of spin and regurgitate it on cue (that's where Tony failed - he couldn't regurgitate it properly) without genuine thought or consideration for the often dire impacts on countless people outside the power ring ... nothing to do with competence or native ability.
    Paulodapotter
    1st May 2017
    10:49am
    Good debt is simply borrowing to invest with a long term view of making a profit. This is what governments should be doing in health and education. This government hasn't a long term view and doesn't value education as a means of advancing our productivity and fiscal growth. The ALP has been lambasted continuously by the LNP for increasing debt, but the LNP has continued to increase bad debt while unwilling to invest in "good" debt such as in education and health, both of which will improve our fiscal position into the future. Instead they continue to pander to the wealthy which does nothing to improve Australia's fiscal position, but places even more wealth into the hands of the few.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    1:01pm
    Absolutely correct, sadly, Paulodapotter. Heaven help us all if they are not removed soon.
    Old Geezer
    6th May 2017
    9:21am
    Heaven helps us it that other mob gets back into power is more like it.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    10:58am
    The biggest examples of bad debt are welfare including OAP, Gonski and NDS. Health is more about patching up people after the horse has bolted and education is about fleecing those who want to achieve and pandering those who never will.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    11:48am
    Rubbish - OAP and other social security - in writing from The Guv itself - is funded by a portion of income tax and levies on other strands of taxation - and as a core issue for government has nothing to do with borrowing in any way shape or form.

    All government borrowing into consolidated revenue can be labeled 'good' or 'bad', depending on ideology - but the reality is that this government and those of the States are going to have to learn to live within their means while continuing to uphold their contract with the people - or get out.

    They all need to fully review their spending, and not on core issues such as Social Security.

    Borrowing to fill the Black Hole created by stealing $130Bn for their personal 'future fund', and borrowing $50Bn to pay someone else to build ships, and borrowing $50Bn to fund tax cuts to greedy business - are all BAD borrowings, and they are not alone.
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    12:28pm
    Get off your high horse on welfare OG, I had enough of that on the previous topic.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    12:53pm
    Well let's face it most people who gets sick do so from bad life choices. We educate those who will never succeed but charge those who will like a wounded bulls. We are doing nothing but prolonging the life of those who neglect it and wasting money on educating those who will amount to nothing. Completely the wrong way around.

    Why prolong the life of those whose quality of life is bad? Makes no sense to me at all. Nursing homes do just that. Palliative care does just that. These are really nothing but cruelty. We don't let animals suffer like this but do so with humans.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:58pm
    So next time I walk into a room filled with cancer patients, and make them laugh in true Patch Adams style, I will assume they are all there because of bad choices in life or laziness in thinking etc or pure moral degeneracy?

    Should we send all sick people to the gas ovens rather than treat them now, OG? That's what you're saying here.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:02pm
    If you smoke, drink or have bad diet etc and get cancer it is a life choice. By the time you get to that room filled with cancer patients yourself then your life has already changed for the worst even if they manage to delay the cancer killing you. Cancer is never cured it's just that something else gets you before it does.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    1:03pm
    Well, OG declared my disabled grandson should not have been allowed to live, so I guess that's exactly what he's saying, Trebor. Not a compassionate bone in his body, and not an ounce of human decency either.
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    1:19pm
    OG I am ashamed of you, how dare you make that comment above, I was a nursing sister for many years and I can tell you now many cancer and accident patients were in the wards through no fault of their own, nothing to do with lifestyle etc. My brother has MS, NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS LIFESTYLE EITHER, what are you advocating OG euthanasia for all these people?.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:19pm
    I too have a disabled son but he became disabled after birth through a bad decision I made in allowing him to have one of those injections of toxic substances. If he had been disabled at birth he would not have lived. That is what human decency is all about.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:23pm
    There would be over 70% of people in hospitals due to bad life choices. The jury is still out on MS.
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    1:30pm
    Old Geezer you need to watch you bloody mouth -- my Husband was a clean living man who died with a very rare bone cancer at the age of 50 and 3 weeks -- so get off your bloody high horse and wake up to yourself. There are people that get ill and die even as little Children, would you call them deserving of death?
    You are a nasty bit of work!
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    1:36pm
    What toxic substance are you talking about OG?, I worked in Obstetrics for 4 years and those so called toxic substances saved many newborns lives, I am sorry your son ended up disabled, maybe he was allergic to whatever he was given, did you get a definite reason for his disability from the Dr'?,s was he tested at all or did you come to this conclusion on your own?.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:41pm
    PlanB I have had cancer twice myself and live a healthy life. All I am saying is that if people made better lifestyle choices then our health budget would be a lot less. The hospitals are full of people making bad lifestyle choices. Also watch what happens when driverless cars take over and the road accident rate falls to almost zero. Yes it is a bad lifestyle choice to drive a car or ride in one today.

    I only say it like it is and that is how it really is.
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    2:13pm
    So OG was your sickness caused by YOUR life style?

    Sure there are some that choose a lifestyle but there are others that choose a good and healthy one and sometimes it is the "healthy" life style people that get ill and DIE -- sometimes we do not have a choice I do not think your attitude is at all caring in anyway.
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    3:34pm
    Og what do you mean by saying if your son was born disabled he would not have lived? Would you have done the unthinkable?, I have seen many children born disabled who have lead healthy happy lives.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    3:53pm
    Yes my cancers were caused by my exposure to toxins as a child.

    You don't allow a disabled animal to live so why a child? Anyone allowing such a child to live is doing the wrong thing by that child.
    Triss
    1st May 2017
    4:26pm
    OG, don't I remember you saying a few weeks ago that you have had cancer?
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    5:55pm
    Yes I have it twice both being completely different and unrelated. Even though they were 50 years apart the treatment wasn't much difference. Little progress have been made thanks to big pharma.
    Paulodapotter
    1st May 2017
    6:24pm
    Spoken like a true ignoramus, Old Geezer. I'll bet you don't value an education, but think degrees are just a way of keeping the stupid away from screwing up the country.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    7:09pm
    Way too many people with degrees today so they are virtually worthless. Many employers now using other criteria to select their employees as degrees are just too easy to get and have little indication of what that person can do.
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    7:15pm
    Og that amounts to murder, just because a child is born disabled does not mean they don't have a right to life.
    Triss
    1st May 2017
    8:10pm
    Just shows how a civilised and presumably intelligent country can descend so quickly into genocide.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:27am
    Oh, well, OG - for your third bout of cancer you go to the Casey Agonistes ward... read it some time - a good story by the guy who wrote The sand Pebbles - Richard McKenna...

    Casey Agonistes.....
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    7:44am
    So, OG, Stephen Hawking should have been killed when his disease was diagnosed? How many others, like him, have made major contributions to society despite serious disability? Personally, I would rather see greedy, self-serving narcissists killed than the good folk who suffer misfortune through no fault of their own but bravely battle on. All the disabled folk I know are loving, generous, happy, and kind. These are qualities we should cultivate, not destroy.
    LiveItUp
    2nd May 2017
    7:57am
    You would need to ask Stpen KHawking that question. Why should these people be allowed to battle on? That's nothing but cruelity. Same with people in nursing homes with little or no quality of life. We are certainly cruel not compassinate humans.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    8:15am
    Sounds to me like Bonny is one and the same as OG heartless / elitist scum and have NO empathy for anyone or anything!
    Triss
    2nd May 2017
    8:27am
    The phrase I worry about, Bonny, is "Why should these people be allowed". That means to me that you feel you should have the right to terminate the lives of a certain section of people because, in your opinion, they are worthless. That's Genocide. Hitler, thought like you, Pol Pot thought like you, Kmer Rouge, etc.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    9:52am
    Yes, Triss - but like the Good German who guarded the gate of the concentration camp, or the 'good' revolutionary Khmer - Bonny does not KNOW (s)he thinks that way... it's as natural as breathing... very hard to shake.... and impossible to cure....
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    10:36am
    Bonny and OG are certainly not people I would like to associate with no matter how much they say they do to help other people not as well off as themselves. With their outlook on life I would be surprised if they had any friends at all, real friends I mean not just associates.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    10:54am
    Ha ha if you met me I'd probably be you bestie.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    10:57am
    I hope you have all opted out of organ donation as if you don't you don't have much chance of living if ever you go into a coma. Organs are in such short supply. I'm lucky as who is going to take a chance of life knowing they have a good chance of contracting cancer instead.
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    1:09pm
    You wouldn't be eligible anyway OG so why mention it.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:10pm
    Freedom is not the unconstrained right or privilege to do whatever you want - freedom is the absence of tyranny. I suspect that most would choose a different path from the tyrannical one of simply abandoning those unfortunates on a hillside in the winter snow.....
    ex PS
    3rd May 2017
    4:41pm
    Every one should follow OGs advice, you won't actually live longer but you will will sure as hell feel like it. And every day will be miserable.
    Old Geezer
    3rd May 2017
    7:49pm
    I don't know what miserable is as I am too busy having fun instead.
    Happily retired early
    1st May 2017
    10:58am
    The LNP have got to be joking they have been banging on about debt and deficits since Rudd was PM the first time. That's all we heard from Tony the Mouth Abbott for years and now it's a good thing which is what most of the Australian public knew anyway. The LNP have done nothing worthwhile the whole time they have been in, just wasted years of economic opportunity,it's time for an election to get these clowns out.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:02pm
    Morrison says it's only selectively 'good' - apparently we old Lifters (retired) are now too costly to feed despite feeding these parasites for decades.

    Morrison is a pure psychopath - by definition.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    1:06pm
    Welfare is ''good debt'' because it improves the quality of life of the less fortunate, improves social health, and pumps money into the economy that will be spent on consumables, thus driving more employment, higher business profits, and higher taxes.

    Company tax cuts, superannuation tax concessions, negative gearing, and GCT concessions are BAD DEBT because they impose cost on the public to enrich tax dodgers who hoard their obscene wealth. The money does not flow back into the economy to support growth.

    Therefore, by definition, all the policy decisions thus far made by this LNP have increased BAD DEBT.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:14pm
    Nope welfare is bad debt as it doesn't produce anything but lazy people who do nothing for the economy.
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    1:38pm
    Spot on Rainey, CGS, NG are all welfare for the wealthy.
    Adrianus
    1st May 2017
    3:53pm
    Gosh Rainey, I didn't realise it was that simple? To strengthen the economy and become the envy of all G20 nations. We just rebrand welfare as "good debt" then quadruple it.
    Paulodapotter
    1st May 2017
    6:26pm
    That's sociopath, Trebor :)
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:18pm
    My apologies, Paulo - I sometime make a quick mistake - you are correct.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    7:51am
    I did not suggest being totally irresponsible in the allocation of welfare, Frank. But paying ''welfare'' to the rich and cutting taxes of those who can afford to hoard creates BAD DEBT. We should be restructuring tax and welfare programs to put more in the hands of those who spend, and at the same time to create incentives and rewards for pursuing a responsible lifestyle. Expand income support to assist people to lift themselves and their families up out of hardship, instead of using it as a means to keep people down, and the economy would improve rapidly.
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    9:27am
    No Frank just import another free million people. Makes the GDP look spectacular.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    12:18pm
    TREBOR isn't it strange how these -- "full on Christian nuts" like Morrison have no empathy at all
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:16pm
    It's the utter lack of empathy and of remorse over damage done that seriously worries me.

    Similar case with the Christians in the family recently - the ex's daughter, the middle child between two brothers with the eldest being a Christian - was throw out of her home by her husband, and her younger brother immediately drove over and took her in for five weeks until the reality hit the husband that he was going to be THE big loser from divorce (you can't throw your missus out on the street now without a brass razoo these days) - meanwhile the Christians (eldest and wife) did not one thing for little sister, ignored her, and actually FED the husband with bad stories about her and supported him in his lie that she'd walked out on the kids etc (he was hoping that BS line would gain advantage)...

    Really makes me wonder about those who are so intent on 'doing the Christian thing'.... I suspect Christ would chastise them severely, perhaps even whip the money changers out of the Temple... sounds apt to me re Morrison...
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    3:34pm
    Same type as TONY ABBOTT who was once a priest -- he lied about everything he said and he has no empathy either
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    1:02pm
    Funny thing is the ex's best friend is a Seven Dayer (I think) - and she and her husband are the nicest and most generous people. Anyway - whatever lot it is, they were the ones accused of signaling Japanese submarines off the coast of NSW in WW II (figure that one out!)...
    Eddy
    1st May 2017
    11:19am
    Putting in a personal scale, taking out a mortgage (at a price you can afford)is good debt, it provides a roof over your head and will (hopefully) appreciate in value. Bad debt is putting unnecessary purchases you don't really need on your credit card.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    11:31am
    Nope a mortgage on a house you live in is bad debt as it costs you money and you get no tax relief from the interest and expenses of owning it. Good debt is where you make more money than the debt costs you to have. I use good debt all the time.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:01pm
    Thank you, OG, for your support of the Trebor Party thought policy of paying home owners mortgage allowance, same as rental assistance.
    Rae
    1st May 2017
    12:08pm
    Yes OG Someone should explain positive gearing to people and how wealth can be built slowly and surely. I'm glad I learned how to do it. No government support and I just got the CPI at just on $400. Who knows how much the insurance will cost and the crazy speculators have forced up rates as well.

    I honestly can't work out how an OAP can afford these rising costs that are essential but don't actually benefit you year after year. Like throwing money into a money pit.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:47pm
    Breaking news in the Trebor Times - home owners to receive tax concessions for household repairs and maintenance, along with mortgage payments..... Treasurer I. Will Screwem says this is not a new form of welfare but only fits in with the current concessions granted to property investors.....
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    12:56pm
    Further breaking news you will now pay capital gains tax on your own home.

    Trebor that is why you can't get tax concessions for them. Your house is not taxable.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    12:57pm
    Yes Rae it is obvious very few understand negative gearing here. Negative gearing is a mugs game where as positive gearing is wealth building. No point is making a loss just for a few tax crumbs. Better to have positive cash flow for those tax crumbs.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:59pm
    CG properly handled won't hurt much anyway - it's concessional and doesn't even begin to match the concessions along the way...

    Vive l'egalite`
    KSS
    1st May 2017
    2:04pm
    Come the revolution TREBOR and you will do as you are damn well told!
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:20pm
    That's always the case even with a 'bloodless coup' such as the orderly transfer of power in society from men to women.... the casualty list is still rising... it's like that scene in Gone With The Wind where people go down to the post office to look at the lists of the latest deaths and injuries...

    Just saying (as an American lass I knew used to say)...
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:29am
    She was from Georgia, too - oh that southern accent.... that damned Yankee Sherman!
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    9:30am
    If homes are to be classed as assets for capital gains will the costs be tax deductible? I'd like that.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    9:54am
    .. or as asset for the pension, Rae, or viewed as an opportunity to repay OAP as some kind of mythical debt to the government. If that is to be the case, then all costs associated with home should be deductible during working life and even paid pension life.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    1:43pm
    Nope the debt is against your estate not your house so nothing is deductable against the house.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:18pm
    There is no debt and never will be - and if there is any call on an estate then tax concessions need to be set in place over taxpaying life to compensate.

    I promise any government that tries that one on a nice spot in front of the firing squad...

    You are a dreamer, OG and a selfish sadist.
    Farside
    3rd May 2017
    6:34pm
    @TREBOR - "I promise any government that tries that one on a nice spot in front of the firing squad..."

    In whose reality is this going to happen? All sizzle, no sausage on this one.
    ex PS
    7th May 2017
    12:25pm
    So you are better off paying someone else $360.00 a week to help them pay off their investment property than to put that money into paying off your own home.
    So when it is paid off you are living rent free, your figures don't work out O.G.
    If you invested the money left over after paying rent over the same time used to pay off a mortgage, how much would you have? And how much would it bring in as an income? As I said, I don't think your figures stack up.
    For it to work out,you would have to make as much as the house is worth in that time and have it invested in a secure investment environment, the money invested would have to make the same or more than the average medial rental value in the area that you bought in.
    Anonymous
    8th May 2017
    1:34pm
    Buying a home is, for most people, the most sensible financial investment you can make. OG is talking utter nonsense. If you choose to have a family, you need somewhere to live. Rent goes up every year. It takes a massive chunk of your income. A mortgage might be a strain in the first few years, but inflation rapidly reduces the percentage of your salary put to repayments and interest, and you have the option of adjusting the repayments to minimize your total interest costs. Meanwhile, the house is appreciating in value. Ultimately, you pay out the mortgage and then you have security of tenure at very low cost for the rest of your life. Just ask the OAPs who rent if a house is a good investment. They are all saying they wish they owned a home. Even OG says it's hard for pensioners who rent, so he contradicts himself (AGAIN!)
    invisible sock
    1st May 2017
    11:37am
    "Good debt" will soon become "bad debt" if it isn't targeted correctly, at the right areas, to boost productivity in the long term.
    "Pork barrelling" in marginal electorates very rarely falls into this category, unfortunately.
    Rosret
    1st May 2017
    2:08pm
    Off topic but I love your nom de plume.
    Do you know if you start looking for the run away socks they start appearing in the oddest of places. hehe
    Just made me laugh as it's the bane of the wash load sorting!
    invisible sock
    1st May 2017
    2:33pm
    I think it's another name for those socks that don't show above the shoe.
    Made me laugh too when I first heard it.
    Rosret
    1st May 2017
    6:17pm
    :) ah yes - really showing my age!

    1st May 2017
    11:41am
    What a load of cods - all Morrison is doing is making some arbitrary dividing line and saying, without foundation, that some parts of government expenditure are 'bad' and some are 'good'. All ideology driven and nothing else.

    Sack him.
    Paulodapotter
    1st May 2017
    6:31pm
    But how strident was he when criticizing the ALP for increasing debt - bad debt of course. Pollies have a penchant for redefining concepts to suit themselves. Now he has an excuse for increasing debt - any debt.

    1st May 2017
    12:04pm
    And where, pray tell, are all these solid infrastructure projects on the horizon?

    Railways to nowhere to suit a mining rip-out?

    We need infrastructure for AUSTRALIA - not for some one-off disposable use, and that means a hell of a lot different from the current mode of non-thinking.
    Rae
    1st May 2017
    12:10pm
    Come now TREBOR we all know how tight fisted and greedy Gina is.
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    12:38pm
    DArn right this Adani mine crap is criminal and who the hell is going t want to use the line Barnaby Joyce wants the taxpayer to pay for whats wrong with that creep, lying dead head that he is Joyce as well as that Matt Canavan he is pure evil -- what money are they ALL making out of this Adani mine -- as they are all pretty p^%%ed of at the Banks not wanting to back it.
    Rae
    1st May 2017
    2:17pm
    Damned if I can figure the LNP/IPA out. First they appear to be working for China and now India. Now foreign investment may be a good thing but not at the expense of your own people surely.
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    3:16pm
    Or our own COUNTRY Rae, they seem to be very happy to allow foreign ownership of the best land in our country
    Paulodapotter
    1st May 2017
    6:35pm
    Glad to see some people on the same page. The great railway line infrastructure for mining in Queensland is the answer to improving public transport and providing a great service to regional users - NOT!
    HDRider
    1st May 2017
    12:08pm
    I'm Shocked,everyone arguing about good debt/bad debt and idiot treasurer, who now apparently stole these words/ideas from labour's Paul Keating, according to Keating!
    These blokes have degrees (supposedly) in economics, and here we all are arguing that we know better lmao.
    Well my friend's let me explain some BASIC Economics and some BASIC English:
    GOOD and DEBT DO NOT BELONG IN THE SAME SENTENCE, the closest you get to a good debt is an interest free loan that is invested in a high return fund etc. Time to think of another name for it.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    12:16pm
    If degrees in economics were a solid investment, this nation would have been in roses decades ago - every clown with an economics degree has the answer... until it falls flat again.

    It's a bit like generals on the Western Front - one after another came up with the 'right mix' to break the German lines...... millions of lives later they got it right (Monash did anyway)...
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    12:42pm
    You are right there HDRider, there is NO GOOD debt and this mob have got into more debt than they had when Lab lost -- but Lab' got us out of deep Doo Doo when Rudd was in
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:16pm
    Rudd certainly got us into the Doo Doo we are in today when he over panicked and just spent what ever he could. Biggest waste of money I have ever seen. All those new tellies did nothing for our economy but helped out those overseas in a big way.
    Adrianus
    1st May 2017
    4:09pm
    Correct Old Geezer. Swan, Henry and Rudd threw our money around like drunken gamblers after a big win. They were coerced by the IMF and others with the platitudes their only benefit. They awarded Swan "Finance Minister of the World." I include Henry because Rudd did anything he said. Economic vandals, who now vote down any attempt at repair.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    7:32am
    Utter rubbish, Frank. That's LNP propaganda and a pack of lies. The truth is that Howard and Costello threw money around like drunken sailors, handing the benefits of the boom out to the wealthy and creating obligations that were not sustainable once the boom ended. 80% of handouts by Howard and Costello went to the top 20% of earners. And these earners are now screaming at a government that is suggesting some of these unaffordable benefits should be minimally trimmed.

    I never liked Swan, but I had to admire him for the way he guided Australia through the GFC. Yes, he ran up debt - not nearly as fast as this stinking government, and he didn't persecute the poorest while handing out to the rich either. But despite inheriting unaffordable obligations from a profligate Howard/Costello team that wasted the profits of the boom, he managed to contain debt and keep Australia's economy very healthy by world standards. Not so the current mob of greedy, self-serving morons, who are now looking for pathetically weak excuses for their massive failure.
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    9:40am
    Frank I was in the US in 2009 and it was terrifying. As the house flippers investments were confiscated or they walked away the renters were thrown out into the streets. Millions were homeless. The Malls, shops, restaurants etc were empty day after day. Banks and Insurance companies were just closing down, bankrupted.

    If Rudd has ignored the problem here at least one of the big banks, and Macquarie and a major insurer would have been bankrupt too. They were exposed to short term debt. The $900 wasn't about TVs or retail It was just a way to get money flowing through banks so the liquidity problem didn't create a bank run. The US FED also lent a huge sum into the system to protect our banking.

    That was why Swan got the award. It was very deliberate and quick solution with the people totally unaware how close to the edge we actually came. Not only saving our Financial system but preventing a demand drought and saving small business as well.

    It won't happen like that next time though.
    Not a Bludger
    1st May 2017
    12:16pm
    Moaning and groaning from all of you instant experts - I prefer to leave things to those who have real knowledge and expertise in such matters.

    But, one of the primary responsibilities of government is to renew and develop new infrastructure - so just get on with it - and all of you commentariat just zip it
    Rosret
    1st May 2017
    12:56pm
    That wouldn't be any fun NaB.
    It is interesting to hear what people think and feel. I am sure someone from the government reads these comments and gets a feel for the public response.
    They aren't interested in the blind left or right but rather the logical thinker.
    And NaB it is one of the primary responsibilities of government is to renew and develop new infrastructure and they are doing just that.
    However, migration overtook infrastructure development and we are in a pickle. We couldn't absorb the volume of intake and we didn't count on the large child population growth of our new immigrants at a much younger parental age than our existing cohort.
    They also didn't see the impact of medical science keeping all we oldies alive for so much longer.
    However his reference to the non working population as BAD debt is rather poorly thought out given he is a politician.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:23pm
    Yes - those 'real experts' have been doing a wonderful job for forty odd years now - ever since Bob Hawke kicked off The Rape Of Australia (title of my embryonic book idea - start with Hawke and then goes downhill all the way)...
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    12:30pm
    Time the govt did something about infrastructure in the country and not always concentrate on cities, we are getting left behind.
    Adrianus
    1st May 2017
    4:14pm
    Agree, Misty. One way to fix the so called housing unaffordability is to create jobs in regional areas. To this end we can stop making it hard for businesses to employ workers for a start. Reducing taxes is, red and green tape would be a start in the right direction.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:28pm
    Good thinking - the problem about regionalising work etc is that it's always been difficult to do... until a certain number of people enter a region the whole thing simply doesn't coalesce into a viable and self-supporting community, and usually ends with many still left out of the jobs and such.

    Western Sydney is a classic example, with insufficient infrastructure to support massive 'dormitory suburbs' and the jobs too far away for the majority. All well and good to have a Macca's and a tyre place down the road - but they only employ a few, and the rest need to travel far afield to get to work, and there is inadequate rail, nearby parking to even access rail, and road networks, and the costs are sky-rocketing due to 'private' roads and such and increasing train fares.
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    8:05pm
    I was thinking more in the area of outback, Snowy Mountains etc, as far as I am concerned Western Sydney is still city.
    Adrianus
    1st May 2017
    9:19pm
    The Unions and Labor had the hairs stand on their necks when Tony Abbott wanted to move 20,000 Public Servant jobs from Western Sydney to North Queensland. The union members didn't want to relocate to a more affordable area. They wanted the government to slow down the fast lane.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:32am
    Yes, Misty - I was using it as an example.. but I'd rather be with Clancy out there on the Overflow.... moved up from way down south a year ago today - still warm here but it would be cold there.... and I love the cold....
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:33am
    Move up to the tropics? You'd have to be out of your mind....
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    10:43am
    Beautiful weather here in the Snowies TREBOR, not too cold yet and the countryside is a picture with all the glorious Autumn colours at the moment.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    10:50am
    If I need to put on a jumper it is too cold for me. I went to the Snowys in summer once. Never again as I didn't like the snow.
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    1:00pm
    Should have stayed a bit longer OG don't know what you are missing,
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    12:43pm
    This mob couldn't even get the NBN right they have really stuffed that up
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:30pm
    Mine is no faster than ADSL and drops out just as positively (if that is the term to use).... waste of bloody time and money.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    8:01am
    Thank TREBOR, for your reply -- seems they have not fixed anything about this NBN my BIL in Victoria has the fibre to the home and said it is great -- the fibre to the node is a disaster
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    9:57am
    My provider hinted darkly that if I 'needed' new work into my home - I had to pay for it...... hmmm.. just hmmmmmmm.....
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    2:54pm
    And maybe it would cost a small fortune TREBOR?
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:22pm
    Quite a bit - I wasn't brave enough to ask.... so it seems I could have a FE cable into my home, but I'd have to pay for the full connection from the node in the street, which probably includes digging up the street etc.

    The node approach seems like an attempt to find a cheaper way, and it simply has failed to do the job.
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    5:27pm
    A friend had to have cable into the home to get the modem to stop dropping out on the landline and it wasn't that expensive. Funnily he's the only person I know without a computer.
    Rosret
    1st May 2017
    12:45pm
    I understood what he was saying but his choice of words to explain the difference between welfare, education, health and infrastructure was really rather insensitive.
    Education and health are only of benefit if they return a profitable outcome. ie. the child is employable and the sick patient can work again. By that account educating the retired or indeed medicating them is in his words BAD as we offer nothing in return.
    Investing in infrastructure is good for the economy so long as their is a return. ie No point in building theatres or museums unless they can return a tourist dollar. Yet infrastructure debt, because it is profitable is being sold off to private enterprise so they can't offset Welfare debt from the profit they have made from infrastructure sell offs.
    OMG its coming back to bite them.
    Well dear Government, the only way you are going to retrieve some of that money from OUR utilities is to TAX them - not us - cause they have the money and we don't.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:32pm
    You need to be very wary of raising the spectre of those sick who will not return to work being triaged out of the system and allowed to pass into the darkness... same with kids who may or may not be employable - at the current rates of un- and under-employment, that is hardly a case for chopping the guts out of education or making it impossibly expensive.

    Never mention such ideas around the likes of Obersturmbahnfuhrer Morrison... he might design a gas chamber.... for the greater good of the economy..... (don't laugh)....
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    9:52am
    Strangely TREBOR I had a moment when listening to him where I actually envisaged black windowed buses picking up the disabled children to go to those "health" resorts. Obviously I'm not the only one.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    10:00am
    The 'thinking' is the same - all that differs is the degree of action taken.... slowly starving them or curtailing medical intervention on a sort of 'economic triage' works better and goes over better in the papers.... no care taken and no responsibility.... bus-ing them to the abyss is too blatant.... even for Morrison.

    (damn - and I was accused on another forum of not being a natural story teller - guy hates my books)...
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    12:14pm
    I would not put it past --Obersturmbahnfuhrer Morrison -- How true that name is TREBOR, I would not put it past him and a few others in that party either if they could just get away with it
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:28pm
    Easier to scare some of the old bastards to death with all the fear-mongering about their pension, their super, their assets, and their estate etc, at a time when they are wanting to retire to a quiet life - or, failing that, to simply squeeze the cash out of them until they can't afford to eat.

    You only need to 'relocate' a percentage to bring the OAP bill back within the prescribed lines.

    Back around the turn of the century, the blokes going through DVA and Service injury were finding the going tougher and tougher.... I posted a letter in a newsletter and stated that, quite simply, the government had not budgeted for a massive increase in Service pensions, up to and including TPI for PTSD etc.

    At the same time I know personally men who have been injured on non-active service - one in a parachute jump that went wrong - and they were stonewalled until they simply gave up.

    That long-forgotten dockside guarantee.... seems I've heard that somewhere before.... this nation owes a debt of gratitude to those who've served, even in a non-active role, in which they were still prepared to risk life and limb at a moment's notice.

    (but then, according to one pundit, as a writer I'm not a 'natural storyteller')...
    Pamiea
    1st May 2017
    12:55pm
    Simple!! Cut spending. In our homes if things are getting tight we pull our heads in and reign in spending until the situation is better.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    1:09pm
    They have been trying to do so but the Senate blocks nearly everything. If they wait it out then it will eventually become worse and they will have to do it anyway.
    Rosret
    1st May 2017
    1:57pm
    True Pamiea but the question is on what. How much is being spent on the useless NAPLAN for children - and because so many students, parents and teachers realised it was a waste of time they are making even more rules to force children to make an effort.
    We spend so much on the stuff "for show" - lets give every child a laptop (forget the infrastructure required and its short term obsolescence).
    More money is spent on aboriginal administration than what actually gets to the people who actually need it.
    So much money is spent on developmental infrastructure studies to build fast trains, tunnels and bypasses that never eventuate.
    CEO salaries at $5m to make us pay more for stamps and deliver on fewer days then have the hide to claim a success!
    Our council has 40 people indoors and only a handful outside doing maintenance. It is a top heavy bureaucracy and I don't know how it can ever be turned around because its jobs for "the boys".
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:39pm
    Rubbish, OG - they've expanded borrowing beyond their own wildest dreams, and it has nothing to do with the Senate blocking any moves to cut costs. If the proposed cuts were viewed by the senate as right and proper, they would have no problem, so it behoves this nonsense of a government to look elsewhere for its thirty pieces of silver.

    Let's bring back the futures fund, leave company taxes as they are, steadily reduce NG on investment housing until it is no more, and cut out the concession on capital gains tax for a start - then there's the concept of building $50bn worth of ships (railway carriages if you are in NSW) HERE in Oz so the money remains in the economy, and then they can start looking at wealthfare.

    Someone mentioned PPL - well I tend to agree that people should be planning for their own family in the full knowledge that they will need to take time off
    ex PS
    3rd May 2017
    4:46pm
    Tell us OG were you so vocal when your mate Tony blocked everything he could while in opposition, or was that "Good obstructionism"?
    Anonymous
    5th May 2017
    9:16am
    It's ''good obstruction'' in OG's view when it's ensuring more gold in the coffers of the rich and far less given to the needy. It's bad obstruction - and bad debt - when it enables the disadvantaged to have sustenance. OG would love to see all the disadvantaged exterminated.
    Old Geezer
    5th May 2017
    5:03pm
    Rainey even if you gave all the money to your needy it wouldn't take long for it to return with interest to it's rightful owners.
    East of Toowoomba
    1st May 2017
    1:22pm
    Good debt : Bad debt - sounds like a smokescreen to me.
    Liverpool Anne
    1st May 2017
    2:47pm
    ALL DEBT IS BAD.
    Using the term Good Debt is only an excuse to put us further into DEBT.
    I wonder what our interest payments on our so called Good Debt are, that the taxpayer is funding
    Rodent
    1st May 2017
    3:21pm
    Liverpool Anne

    Best comment yet, all Debt must be paid for. Sco Mo is just setting the Electorate up for more Welfare cuts .

    Her is another Perspective, for the thoughtful ones

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2016/dec/15/good-debt-hopefully-this-means-the-end-of-the-dumbest-economic-narrative-of-our-times
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    3:53pm
    Yes Rodent there will be a hidden agenda with Sco Mo, he is a cunning SOB
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:41pm
    Cunning as an outhouse rodent? (snuckles)...
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:46pm
    Good article, Rodent - covers a few of the views expressed here.
    ex PS
    3rd May 2017
    4:49pm
    So Liverpool Anne, did you pay cash for your house, and if you didn't would you consider borrowing for a home, bad debt?
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    5:28pm
    Actually the 'cunning' Morrison is easy to see through - just read this page. Not much really gets past people.... and politicians who imagine they can pull the wool over the eyes of those who've been there... are deluded.
    Jtee
    1st May 2017
    3:00pm
    The greatest shonky award must go to the Maternity leave program. Good idea but should have been paid at a set rate instead of matching people's wages. Women on $160,000 pa getting pro rata of their salary and women on $35,000 getting pro rata of their salary. Unbalanced, and some employers now stating that they really don't want to employ women because of the lengthy time off work and disruption caused.
    Slimmer Cat
    1st May 2017
    3:28pm
    I find it hard to believe that any employer would employ a woman of child bearing age.
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    3:37pm
    What are you on about Slimmer Cat, don't you know it is against the law to discriminate?
    Adrianus
    1st May 2017
    3:59pm
    It's crazy to employ a woman of child bearing age. You know you're in for extra work and extra cost and you cant replace her until she doesn't return. Soon paternity leave will be an issue so employers will be behind the 8 ball if they employ a married couple.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    4:10pm
    I wouldn't employ anyone of child bearing age.
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    4:10pm
    They never liked to employ women of Child bearing age when I was going to work and if they got pregnant they were put off, they would ask you did you intend to have another child b4 they put you on -- if so your were not put on. -- that was in the 50s and 60s
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    4:21pm
    I remember the time when I woman got married she had to leave work. We should bring that back today so the young folk can get jobs.
    Triss
    1st May 2017
    4:55pm
    Are you shooting yourself in the foot, OG? If a woman has to leave the work force when she marries she won't have an income to put towards her pension so she will be on the OAP. Can't have it both ways.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    5:53pm
    Triss she doesn't have much in super anyway so it doesn't matter.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:38am
    There's always been one glaring fallacy in the superannuation argument - women in an established relationship share their old man's super...... same the other way around sometimes, but the fact is more women share more of men's super - as shown by the fact that some women have less.

    Another unanticipated outcome from the good old 'destroy marriage' campaign and the 'make women independent' campaign is that often due to divorce and such early, many women no longer get to share that.

    Oh, well. Even changing the laws so that super of BOTH is supposed to be shared on divorce etc, doesn't change the fact that many older women still don't have any.

    Funny how these grand ideas so often work backwards.... innit?
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    7:26am
    OG rants with so much unsubstantiated nonsense! ''She doesn't have much in super anyway so it doesn't matter''!!!! What idiotic CRAP. Some women have far more in super than their husbands. All depends on their income and how much they elect to put into super, and how well their fund invests and returns.

    I tend to agree that society functioned better when women primarily stayed home and raised families, and that we might do well to support women better to do just that (instead of giving huge maternity leave payments to the wealthy and minimal to the struggling lower wage earners). But doing that would require a sensible program for funding retirement for women who chose to be homemakers - one that didn't make them third-class citizens and hard up in retirement if their marriage happened to fail later in life. A smart approach might be to implement the system the military used decades ago, of deducting a fixed sum from the husband's salary and paying to the wife as her private income. Supplement that by requiring the husband to contribute to his wife's superannuation as well as his own. Major changes to the tax system would be needed also, to ensure lower income earners could afford to make the choice for the wife to be a homemaker.

    Another suggestion I've read that makes good sense to me is to implement a ''negative tax''. That is, if you earn below a given income threshold, the ATO pays you, despite you not having earned enough to pay tax. Replacing social security with a negative tax system could potentially eliminate massive administration costs and headaches and make the whole social security system much more efficient, as well as giving people more freedom of choice that might enable greater success. I know many who, given the opportunity to study or claim income support while starting a business, would have moved from hardship to prosperity and employing others. It is simply not logical to suggest that income support should be given only while you remain poor and desperate, sick, or disabled. That policy is proof positive that the goal of ''welfare' is to keep people down - not, as it should be, to help them up.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    7:49am
    I agree that if a Woman wants Kids then STAY AT HOME AND LOOK AFTER THEM, don't farm them out.
    ex PS
    3rd May 2017
    4:51pm
    Mine sure did Rainey. And mighty glad of that I am.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    5:29pm
    If a woman on $160k can't budget for family - how in hell does she deserve that much pay?
    rtrish
    1st May 2017
    3:12pm
    If there is "good debt" and "bad debt" then surely education - whether at university or in other spheres such as the excellent, much-attacked-by-government TAFE system, should be part of good debt. Invest in the country and its people.
    Rosret
    1st May 2017
    6:23pm
    Yes - but I am not so sure they agree otherwise they wouldn't impose HECS debts and up the cost of TAFE courses.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:40am
    The HECS debt, which was not a cost shared by those who implemented it, is designed to create a 'classed' society - those better off will be better off again through not having a HECS debt.

    Free Education for all!
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    7:01am
    rtrish, depends who you are educating. When someone who has faked disability for 30 years runs up a $50,000 HECS debt that will never be repaid because she will never consent to do a day's honest work - EVER - that's NOT good debt. But the government allows this to happen, while persecuting honest strugglers who genuinely seek to improve their status and contribute to society.
    LiveItUp
    2nd May 2017
    7:48am
    What about all those retirees running up HECS debts that will never be repaid? Legislation is well over due to have these becomes debts upon their estates. If they can have people repay them before they leave the country they can haventhem repaidbwjen people leave this mortal world.

    Why educate those who will never use that education? Waste of money if ever I saw it.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    10:05am
    Bonny.. dearest - I've been on disability since 1997 awaiting DVA... and now am on full retirement - during that time I ran up some nice HECS bills - with every intention of getting lack into the workforce, where I would be today if left to my own devices and not hounded from pillar to post by government as some kind of leech.

    I can walk proper now but still get questions about my Disability Parking card...

    I feel I put what I've learned to very good use here and elsewhere, sniping at government policies with great effect. they bloody well deserve it.
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    10:06am
    Use it for what purpose Bonny? Maybe learning to grow food for the community or some other useful purpose is "good" education. Everything isn't about creating profits for the Corporation or it shouldn't be.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:31pm
    Ah - specialist report just in - looks like a heart valve.. could explain the pain and breath shortness after ten metres walk or so, one and a quarter laps in the pool and that's it .... there's your Disability Parking right there.... you need to walk further than that without pain.. and I look so fit as well... damn it...
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    5:32pm
    Sorry to hear that TREBOR. Dad hd his fixed and it gave him an extra 25 years or so.
    downunder
    1st May 2017
    3:36pm
    Good debt - bad debt - what an idiot! Giving a billion to Adani is good, but a billion for pensions is bad. You got to be a member of the LNP government to understand that. Bunch of hypocrites
    downunder
    1st May 2017
    3:36pm
    Good debt - bad debt - what an idiot! Giving a billion to Adani is good, but a billion for pensions is bad. You got to be a member of the LNP government to understand that. Bunch of hypocrites
    Adrianus
    1st May 2017
    3:54pm
    Adani will repay it, while welfare recipients will not.
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    4:08pm
    Agree the government gets not a razoo back from welfare payments including OAP.
    PlanB
    1st May 2017
    4:12pm
    Rubbish OG how the hell do you know that Adani will pay it back they can't even pay for their own Rail -- and the banks have told them NO
    Adrianus
    1st May 2017
    4:15pm
    The $1b is a loan.
    Mad as Hell
    1st May 2017
    4:18pm
    MORE LNP SPIN
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    4:19pm
    At least they will pay resource royalties which is a lot more than those welfare.
    Rosret
    1st May 2017
    6:30pm
    Frank the OAP money should be money from taxes that has been put away in a special investment account over the last 50 years. Has it? - Doubt it. It actually shouldn't be any more of a burden to the government than it is for our private superannuation investments.
    Mad as Hell
    1st May 2017
    6:30pm
    MORE OG SPIN
    Sundays
    1st May 2017
    7:38pm
    A Government has a duty to take care of its citizens and that includes welfare support for those in need. Who decides what is good debt? I would like to see more spent on health and education (the worst decision is the erosion of TAFE and growth of private colleges), but less spent on defence and foreign aid. There is Govt waste and programs of doubtful value being funded. Look at cutting this wasteful debt first.
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:49pm
    Utter rubbish. Every cent of Social Security returns in very quick order to the economy and thus into the hands of the tax merchants.. the only money that doesn't is that which is tied up in non taxpaying assets or is offshored either by deliberately doing so or by spending it offshore instead of buying local..
    Anonymous
    1st May 2017
    7:53pm
    Here it is again:-

    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/94713ad445ff1425ca25682000192af2/8e72c4526a94aaedca2569de00296978!OpenDocument
    Sundays
    1st May 2017
    8:50pm
    I assume Trebor you're responding to OG's ridiculous comment and not mind
    Old Geezer
    1st May 2017
    10:21pm
    Whata lot of rubbish Trebor? Most welfare goes on food and housing so little if any GST back to the government.

    Duty of care has nothing to do with good or bad debt. Bad debt sinks in a black hole with no return good debt produces a return after interest and expenses. Welfare is a black hole as there is no return at all in it.
    Misty
    1st May 2017
    10:56pm
    What are you going on about OG?, IF PEOPLE HAD NO WELFARE TO FALL BACK ON SHOPS WOULD BE CLOSING LEFT RIGHT AND CENTRE, UNEMPLOYMENT WOULD RISE AND SO WOULD THE CRIME RATE.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:44am
    Indeed I am Sundays. Be not afraid, I'm not biting you..

    Now then, OG - whenever a dollar is spent into the economy, it then re-enters the process of stages of taxation - each transaction of that dollar incurs taxation until that dollar is no more.... UNLESS... (there's always an 'unless') .... that dollar or part of it untaxed into oblivion to that point is hoarded in a bank, or in some asset that pays no tax and may even incur tax concession, or it is offshored somewhere, either through shifting it to a tax haven or spending it somewhere else other than Australia.

    Therefore ONLY those with residual cash do not contribute 100% to the economy.

    Simple, really... so - on that basis - who again are the lifters and who the leaners?
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:51am
    Be kind, Misty - OG simply does not understand the social value, even social profit, from Social Security. Not only is it 100% returned to the economy as above, but its net cost to government is virtually nil, and it provides a solid baseline to the economy and calculations in it simply by it being known how much is going to SS, and therefore how much will be returned to the economy swiftly.

    It is a virtually nil net cost to government for the simple reason that it re-enters that tax cycle immediately, or nearly so, and is thus quickly returned by successive taxes to the government.

    This raises another issue (just for consideration) - why spend money chasing 'centrelink cheats' when the amount involved is recouped through taxation anyway?

    I've explained before how even 'black market' money is but one step of income tax removed from the taxation cycle... the moment the black marketeer spends it.. that money is back on the tax trail.... and is soon gone after a number of transfers/transactions - back into the government coffers.

    Ladies, gentlemen, and you, too, OG ... we are being lied too.... and right royally so....

    Good night.... and yes - I do run a free university. Knowledge is free and so should organised knowledge via education be free.. except for foreign students....
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    12:56am
    Oh - one more thing:-

    To listen to Morrison and his kind, you would swear that Social Security is some endless river draining the government coffer dams, instead of a constantly recycling commodity that effectively costs nothing (if you leave out the costs of Centrelink etc, but those costs are re-absorbed into the tax cycle by a number of channels anyway)...

    The simple reality is - money out = money in - except for your Hoarders - so clearly government is losing through WHERE it is spending money and where it is INCREASING spending, which is, again, only lost when it goes into those areas that create opportunity for hoarding.

    I will hereafter define hoarding as being any means, including offshoring, by which money can be withheld from the economy....
    Rae
    2nd May 2017
    10:11am
    Yes TREBOR which is why the cuts to part pensions for self funding retiree savers was just nasty. There was no need to do it and it simply took money out of Mainstream and small business tills.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    1:49pm
    Rae they are now spending more than they would have before the asset test cuts so it's great for the economy. All the government has to do now is wait until they have spent down their assets and then cut the assets test again. More economic stimulus. Great move by the government.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:34pm
    You really believe that Liberal propaganda, OG? Or are you just the schill I always thought you to be? Your responses are about as realistic as those of a copper trying to entice me to come visit him when he's trying to tell me he's a fourteen year old girl in need of a daddy......

    Pick up your game, son.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:34pm
    HOW would they be spending more when they've got less to spend?
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    9:04am
    OG is right, Trebor. They are spending more to reduce their assets so they can claim a pension because they will be far better off having less. The STUPID government is offering 7.8%+++ return to people who can't achieve 5% on their savings. Of course they will reduce their assets. But they are NOT boosting the economy. They are spending on world cruises. Can't blow it fast enough staying in Oz! Or some are putting it into more expensive houses, thus exacerbating the housing crisis.

    OG is a fool. He cannot grasp a simple concept that people do what benefits them - and when you can take a world cruise at taxpayer expense and be better off on return than you would have been keeping your savings, well... it's not hard to guess how people will respond.

    A financial planner showed me how a client couple with $825,000 could take a $100000 world cruise and be $180,000 better off over 10 years thanks to assets test changes. (Yes, that's right. The taxpayer will pay for their cruise in full and give them $80K on top! Wouldn't they be fools not to go?)
    Old Geezer
    3rd May 2017
    9:55am
    False economy Rainey as I'd be very disappointed if I only turned my $100,000 into $180,000 after 10 rears. At only 10% return that $100,000 would be worth $270,704 in 10 years. However one can do much better than that.

    Rainey check you calculations as $100,000 at 6% return in 10 years is $181940. Very easy to do that in these markets.

    Beside Rainey they have spent the $100,000 and no longer have it but by investing it they still have the $100,000.

    So I really can't see how anyone wold be better off spending the money.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    1:17pm
    Rainey - spending down is a short term 'fix' (if I may call it that) - a one-off measure. Which is better? For those people to have a higher level of discretionary income and thus spend more continuously - or to have them splurge and then have a lower level of discretionary income, and thus spend less continuously?

    The impulse to spurge only creates a temporary spike, which will ten lead to a temporary but longer-lasting downward spike.... roller coaster economics.

    The clock has struck the hour! OG is right! It seems he can work figures, but his social understanding is autistic, to say the least....
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    1:19pm
    Oh - Rainey is right, too - it's all in how you do the figures.... I rely on their expertise in this matter..... two differing views make it interesting.
    Rae
    3rd May 2017
    4:31pm
    Surprising how many people actually prefer to lose money and avoid tax rather than make money and pay a bit of tax. Doesn't make any sense but then people aren't rational are they?
    Old Geezer
    3rd May 2017
    6:23pm
    Agree Rae why lose money just to get a bit of welfare when the alternative gives a much better result.
    Anonymous
    8th May 2017
    1:27pm
    Except it doesn't for many, OG. Because this IDIOTIC government can't grasp simple economics (and neither can you it seems!), many retirees are far better off taking an expensive world cruise and coming back to claim a higher OAP and benefits. I've seen the numbers that prove a friend would gain $180,000 over 10 years by spending $100K now on a luxury holiday.
    gadsby
    1st May 2017
    11:23pm
    Good dept,bad debt,seriously do these people have any idea,i wouldnt let them run a chook raffle ,let alone tell the rest of us what is "good debt ,and bad debt"
    I say paying them there salary is BAD debt,getting rid of them all is GOOD debt,and to make matters worse the other mob arent any better.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    8:07am
    I see they are cutting the Uni money now again too and making the students pay it back sooner and also when they are on a very small wage -- these Kids are going to be in DEEP debt way b4 they can even think about buying a home AND these BASTARDS got their UNI for FREE or very little BUT they try and avoid answering that when asked.
    I know quite a few Uni students that have not got jobs in what they studied for
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    9:37am
    MAkes me fume when While this government is making it harder for students to cover the cost of their education, they’re trying to hand Adani a loan of a billion dollars.

    2nd May 2017
    9:39am
    Just an aside - I've mentioned the Chinese Cultural Revolution a few times - but for interest:-

    "During the Cultural Revolution, the Gang of Four and other Ultra-Leftists listed nine categories of political-social undesirables; intellectuals were at the bottom of the list and were called the 'stinking Number Nine'. The Line-up of the undesirables was:- landlords, rich peasants, counter-revolutionaries, moral degenerates, rightists, renegades, enemy agents, capitalist roaders, intellectuals."

    The more things change..... I know.. I know - this is my traveling around theglobe again...
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    10:59am
    Looks like I was right about reducing the company tax to 15%. Even Pauline is now backing it.

    Word on the street has it that there will be mini budget in August to drop company tax to 15%.
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    11:06am
    Don't hold your breath OG come August this govt may no longer be in power.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    11:08am
    Ha ha there is no one else so don't hold your breath on that one.

    If they don't drop company tax to 15% we will be in big trouble so they really don't have a choice.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    11:59am
    Oh how I pray for that Misty
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    1:03pm
    As do all sensible people.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    1:55pm
    So not too many sensible people about then.
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:55pm
    Pauline wouldn't know her head from her ass about how such a thing works. she sells out to the latest real-sounding voice she hears...

    Companies don't pay enough tax now, and reducing it won't do a thing for unemployment or encourage genuine investment FOR this nation, but will only attract The Usual Suspects intent on daylight robbery.

    Cutting company tax is adding another BAD debt to the budget that will not be recouped via taxation. On your post above - don;'t be stuck on GST and income tax as if those are the only taxes around, OG - that is either totally silly or totally self-serving and duplicitous on your part..... depending on whether or not you truly know the difference.

    Every person who tries to slag those least well of resorts to discussion of income tax and GST as if those are the only games in town.... doesn't work.
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    4:56pm
    That's a matter of opinion OG and mine differs from yours.
    ex PS
    7th May 2017
    12:31pm
    This government is putting itself in a position whereby anybody else is a better option. It told us it had all the answers, it had nothing, three word campaign slogans may help win an election but they are worthless when trying to run a country.
    Rodent
    2nd May 2017
    11:55am
    Hey OG

    I see Liberal MP David Coleman (BANKS) is writing about your favorite subject- WELFARE. He is just repeating much of what he said last Sept, with some minor changes.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    12:23pm
    Why would I be interested in what pollies have to say?
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    12:04pm
    They also talk about lifter and leaners -- but nothing is said about the amount of OUR money that these thieving scum have used for their own good -- = flying lessons and flights all over the place and the grand dos they attend AND take their lovers AND also families and of course the odd helicopter ride -- some pay it back after being hounded -- but still have their jobs on the back bench STILL getting a bloody good wage AND all the lerks and perks when they leave
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    12:21pm
    Mmmm I sense a little jealousy here.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    1:12pm
    OG you make NO sense why would I be jealous ?-- I would never steal from others to pay for my own enjoyment, that what these scum are doing
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    1:41pm
    Then why whinge about it?
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    2:58pm
    I whinge about it OG BECAUSE these BASTARDS are using OUR money to pay for their trips to buy property and go to fancy concerts / dinners etc that they should be paying for themselves.

    Do you support them doing that?
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:56pm
    OG doesn't know the difference..... he hasn't the genuine life experience to accumulate that kind of knowledge.
    Old Geezer
    3rd May 2017
    10:25am
    Sounds like you are envy of them to me. Nothing more. I couldn't care less myself.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    1:22pm
    I couldn't care less what a politician says - I'm waiting to see what they DO.... while retaining the right to make hilarity out of their absurd statements.
    ex PS
    7th May 2017
    12:33pm
    Politicians are all leaners, they are leaning on the trough catching their breath and waiting for another round of free food.
    Priscilla
    2nd May 2017
    12:33pm
    DEBT IS DEBT and calling it good or bad changes nothing! Reducing income tax for large companies/corporations will definitely not reduce debt (good or bad), and will not help the 100,000 unemployed. Bring back all the jobs that have been sent offshore that are making, China, Pakistan, South Africa, Philippines etc., wealthy countries while Australians lose their jobs, homes and lifestyle.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    1:41pm
    Debt like a credit card can be awesome if handled well.

    Cutting company tax to 15% will bring in lots more revenue and stimulate the economy. So more jobs for the unemployed. It is simple economics.
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    1:51pm
    Well what do you know David Gonski has just appeared with the PM who has announced new funding for Australian schools so Gonski will be here for a long time yet.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    1:56pm
    Another big waste of the taxpayer's money.
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    2:01pm
    Wouldn't expect anything less from you OG, so predictable.
    PlanB
    2nd May 2017
    3:01pm
    Yes OG C/Card can be well worth it handled the right way
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    3:58pm
    Perhaps you could explain to us how cutting company tax to 15% will 'bring in lots more revenue' OG... I await your answer with bated breath. Just exactly how does a government go about 'bringing in lots more revenue' but cutting its revenue strands in half?
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    5:37pm
    Here is a simple answer. If a company has a $5 million tax bill it can hire accounts for $4 million to save $5 million in tax. If the tax is only $2.5 million and it's costs $4 million for the accountants to save this tax then it becomes more economic to pay the tax instead. There is a recording on this on the taxpayers website.

    Have a look at the historic records and you will see that every company tax cut has resulted in more tax paid.
    Misty
    2nd May 2017
    6:16pm
    How does that work OG, do accountants have a set fee depending on the amount of tax they save their client?, why would they charge the same fee for 2 totally different amounts?
    Anonymous
    2nd May 2017
    8:53pm
    You seriously imagine the cost benefit of employing a hoard of accountants in relation to your tax burden is 20%? Not even worth a company's time arguing it - and we are not talking about their simple company tax here, OG - we are talking about their tax overall....

    Again you seek to run over opposition by holding to a single item of taxation as if it is the only game in town.

    Most of these accountants are on retainer and are paid for work on a cost benefit basis - no, sir - no company will pay more into revenue that it already does if company taxes are lowered.
    Old Geezer
    2nd May 2017
    9:52pm
    Corporate accountants charge very differently than the normal suburban accountants. Clearly from your comments you have no understanding of this.
    PlanB
    3rd May 2017
    8:20am
    OG you speak absolute CRAP!
    Old Geezer
    3rd May 2017
    9:45am
    CRAP = your ignorance!
    neil
    2nd May 2017
    2:15pm
    Good debt was known as 'the golden rule' years ago, where bye any borrowings had to be seen to be producing further wealth for a country. Whilst interest rates are so low this is the time to be borrowing with so much of our infrastructure in such a ruinous state. By the way I think it was a term first used by Gordon Brown.
    Neil.
    Farside
    3rd May 2017
    11:24pm
    agreed Nell - at these rates the debt mantra should be shelved and government should be refinancing and borrowing like there is no tomorrow for good quality income producing capital projects. Of course we should not be borrowing for recurrent expenditures and non-income producing infrastructure.
    Johnny
    3rd May 2017
    8:28am
    It's really time for a jeff kennett Budget Repair bite!. he introduced a temporary $100 yearly levy on all house owners-it may have been land owbers also but definitely the former. It lasted about 4 years and it helped get the state back ontrack after the Joan Kirner fiasco-State Bank sale, Pyramid Building Society collapse not to mention stae debt which was rampant. If you own a house or land this is NOT too much to ask.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    1:24pm
    How about $20 for home owners and $200 for each investment property? That way the State could get some money and the investor will write it off at federal level... be an interesting fracas....
    Misty
    3rd May 2017
    1:28pm
    Why not run a Commonwealth Debt Recovery Lotto/Lottery, seems they do it for lots of other things, GB did one for the Olympics and look how much gold they won
    Old Geezer
    3rd May 2017
    3:43pm
    Gee that's good I pay nothing.
    Anonymous
    3rd May 2017
    5:20pm
    Now there's an idea...

    Budget Repair Lotto - all proceeds to go into a sovereign fund for disposition to the budget to shore up the holes... coming soon to National Lotteries - Stick Your Finger in A Dyke instant scratchies........
    Farside
    3rd May 2017
    6:44pm
    Morrison made a hash of it by referring to good and bad debt without making it clear what he meant. What he should have said is capital debt is good and recurrent debt is bad. Going into debt on recurrent expenditure and non-income earning infrastructure leads to living beyond your means. Going into debt for income earning capital investments is another thing altogether.
    PlanB
    4th May 2017
    7:34am
    I refuse to participate in more of this thread because Old geezer is such an ignorant and rude troll and I refuse to feed him more
    ex PS
    4th May 2017
    9:25am
    But that is his plan PlanB, get rid of anyone who has an original thought so that he can have an open forum to tell us all how good he is.
    Farside
    4th May 2017
    9:57am
    There would be a real risk of the forum becoming an echo chamber without involvement of OG and other opinions that add to the diversity of views. If you feel you are being trolled just ignore it and focus on the topic rather than playing the man.
    Misty
    4th May 2017
    4:22pm
    As I said before I am sure OG behaves in this way just to rile everyone and get them commenting, he is probably bored to tears with nothing better to do, just ignore what he has to say if you don't agree with him.
    Farside
    4th May 2017
    4:54pm
    @Misty, I agree so far as those easily riled by OG to take your advice and ignore OG but easier said than done once he has pushed their buttons. Nevertheless there is a veracity to many of OG's responses that represent widely held views by those not commenting on these forums. It is when he is personally attacked the commentary degenerates into a slanging match. Actually it's quite funny if you step back and see those accusing him of being insensitive, lacking empathy and not listening could easily have the same accusations levelled at them.
    Old Geezer
    4th May 2017
    6:17pm
    All I'll say is that some people live in a very small sheltered world.
    Farside
    4th May 2017
    6:21pm
    indeed OG and frequently make sweeping generalisations to project their own views and circumstances onto others in the face of evidence to the contrary.
    Anonymous
    5th May 2017
    9:18am
    Yes, OG, you live in a small and sheltered world for sure. You have no idea what life is like for the genuinely disadvantaged or those who have suffered major injustice, and you are determined to deny that such people even exist.
    Old Geezer
    5th May 2017
    3:40pm
    Why not Rainey? I certainly don't want to imagine them like you do.
    Misty
    5th May 2017
    3:52pm
    Rainey doesn't just imagine them OG she sees them as they really are.
    Old Geezer
    5th May 2017
    5:01pm
    Well I certainly don't want her glasses then.
    Anonymous
    8th May 2017
    1:21pm
    Of course not, OG. None of the over-privileged selfish pigs in this nation want to acknowledge the truth of the disadvantaged they have trampled all over and treated so appallingly. Just pretend these people don't exist and you can live comfortably without your conscience bothering you, and continue to be mean and inhuman.

    5th May 2017
    5:21pm
    The comment from Rainey about not trusting the Coalition to make wise spending decisions, would lead one to believe he trusts the other mob. What a joke! Think pink batts, school halls, pokie hand outs to pensioners, yadda yadda. There is a Labor pollie in Victoria who spent over a billion dollars in not building a road! And don't get me started on their desal plant! And dunderheads like Rainey says you cant trust the LNP! Get out from under that mushroom old fella! And to those of you who are whining about company tax rates - well most of you have super funds. Guess what - the more a company retains in reduced tax burdens means your super fund accounts are better off! Who do you trust to spend your money - you, or a government of any persuasion? Get real you old fuddy duddies!
    Misty
    5th May 2017
    5:52pm
    Big Al Labor certainly made a lot of mistakes but you have to give them credit, they did save us from a recession during the GFC, and as for wracking up debt the current Coalition have done a good job haven't they in the 4 years they have been in power, time they took responsibility for that and not keep blaming the previous govt all the time.
    Farside
    5th May 2017
    9:04pm
    and all those LNP voting small and medium businesses were the ones to cut corners and benefit even more from the spending largesse. Yep, that would be the same ones who just received an income tax cut.

    You need to read the AG's report into the failed East-West link before making statements; no side was covered with glory. The pre-election bastardry by Napthine to push the contract through cost the taxpayer about $700k net to unwind however the cost to the taxpayer to proceed would have exceeded $22B; cancelling the arrangements could have been done for less if Andrews had the information in time and avoided altogether if public servants had provided better advice to Napthine but it is what it is. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-09/auditor-general-reports-on-east-west-link-costs/7012618

    And as for the Vic desal, by any measure it was a prudent action to make Melbourne's water supply more resilient by increasing it by half; two-thirds still has to come from catchments and recycling. Every other capital has such a facility. The Thompson dam was down to 16.5% capacity, population was increasing faster than other capitals, no additional catchments and climate change expected to adversely affect long term rainfall. It would have been a courageous but near sighted Premier to gamble and do nothing. What were the consequences if the gamble went pear shaped? Only someone who did not understand risk would have made a different call. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
    Misty
    6th May 2017
    2:28am
    Hear hear Farside, great explanation of the facts.
    Old Geezer
    6th May 2017
    9:20am
    Labor just panicked during the GFC and over spent by a mile. We are still paying for this today. If they had done nothing other than kick the can down the road we would be recovering today like the US and Europe. Instead we are heading in the opposite direction fast.
    Misty
    6th May 2017
    9:53am
    Take off your rose coloured glasses OG, this current govt is a dud, can't even agree amongst themselves how can they run the country?, they have had 4 years to improve things and instead we are going backwards, shops are closing at a great rate in our tourist town, never seen before.
    Old Geezer
    6th May 2017
    10:59am
    That's because the Labor government put us in too much unnecessary debt and kicked the can down the road. If they had let the excesses flow through the system we would be now prospering.
    Farside
    6th May 2017
    11:27am
    Perhaps the GFC debt could have been better spent, definitely better administered, but it likely would not have provided the urgent stimulus. Greed and disregard for safety meant medium to long term benefits suffered. Nevertheless, Australia's GFC debt was chicken feed in the overall scheme of things as a proportion of GDP and relative to other countries. Importantly the stimulus spend kept cash flowing through the economy and buoyed confidence however economic growth remains low. We are still waiting for GFC losses to be eaten before full economic recovery can be achieved.

    It's easy to say with hindsight but a better decision would have been strong incentives to skew support to Australian manufactured products and ramping up manufacturing jobs. Importantly China, USA and Europe used manufacturing and domestic consumption to provide a longer term benefit.
    Misty
    6th May 2017
    11:31am
    Don't agree with your comment OG, I know there have been faults on both sides, bad decisions, obstructive Senate, but this lot have had over 4 years to rectify things and instead just look at them, revolt in the backbench whenever the PM wants to try something different,very unhappy ex PM who will do everything he can to roll the current PM, members breaking away to form their own party, upsetting our neighbours across the ditch, DO YOU WANT MORE REASONS OG?.
    Anonymous
    8th May 2017
    1:40pm
    Big Al, assumptions make you and ASS. I didn't say I approved of Labor's economic management, though they did a better job than this mob of incompetents. Fact is, I don't trust any politician to manage the economy because they are all only interested in advancing their own interests and those of their favoured mates. But the reality is that Howard and Costello blew the surplus, creating huge obligations for future governments by cutting taxes and introducing handouts - 80% of which favoured the richest 20%. Labor had a hard battle trying to undo some of the inequitable and unaffordable commitment Howard and Costello had created. Having inherited those obligations, Labor did very well through the GFC. They could have done better, for sure. They made mistakes, certainly. But this mob is far less competent and is driving the debt sky high while cutting essential services and pensions and attacking wages, which ultimately must drive lower revenue and reduced economic activity, creating more debt. But all they can do is bleat about tax cuts for the rich ''trickling down''. What a load of BS!
    Anonymous
    8th May 2017
    1:40pm
    Big Al, assumptions make you and ASS. I didn't say I approved of Labor's economic management, though they did a better job than this mob of incompetents. Fact is, I don't trust any politician to manage the economy because they are all only interested in advancing their own interests and those of their favoured mates. But the reality is that Howard and Costello blew the surplus, creating huge obligations for future governments by cutting taxes and introducing handouts - 80% of which favoured the richest 20%. Labor had a hard battle trying to undo some of the inequitable and unaffordable commitment Howard and Costello had created. Having inherited those obligations, Labor did very well through the GFC. They could have done better, for sure. They made mistakes, certainly. But this mob is far less competent and is driving the debt sky high while cutting essential services and pensions and attacking wages, which ultimately must drive lower revenue and reduced economic activity, creating more debt. But all they can do is bleat about tax cuts for the rich ''trickling down''. What a load of BS!
    Fisherman
    8th May 2017
    2:31pm
    It would be easier to change the money system! Our current system is based on USURY run by the banking cartels. Iceland solved their problems by changing their money system and prosecuting the bankers. The Bankers Code used to be 363. Borrow at 3%, lend it at 6%, be on the golf course by 3pm. Now that Greed and Fear are controlling society, the Money God reigns supreme and Anger Management courses are becoming essential. Why is there no debate about our archaic money system? Australia was a sovereign nation, capable of printing money backed by gold! What went wrong?


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles
    you might also be interested in...

    Retirement Planning

    When retirement planning becomes life planning it is a challenging, fun and fulfilling task.

    Age pension explained

    Anne explains whether you will qualify for an Age Pension and simplifies some of the more complex scenarios you may encounter dealing with Centrelink.

    Cruising

    Got the travel bug or need a break? Take a look at our latest Seniors travel discounts and deals.

    Meal Ideas

    Be inspired by our easy meal ideas. Search through hundreds of recipes to find the perfect one for any occasion.

    Trivia

    Have some fun and keep your mind active with our Daily Crossword, Trivia, Word Search and Sudoku Games.