Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here
- Thread starter Kul
- Start date
- Status
southerntiger
New member
I have no problem with the tax and I am one of the people that will have to pay it.
What I have a problem with is the dishonest attempt to blame Labor for it.
As formerguest points out, this increase arises because of the foolishness of the latter years of the Howard government in granting tax cuts for political gain. Labor is to blame to the extent to which it is complicit.
However, the need for this tax has nothing to do with the deficit that arose during the GFC from the stimulus and other spending packages.
As always Tony Abbott lies to get his way. He really makes Gillard look like Mother Teresa.
_Posted using RoarFEED V.4_
What I have a problem with is the dishonest attempt to blame Labor for it.
As formerguest points out, this increase arises because of the foolishness of the latter years of the Howard government in granting tax cuts for political gain. Labor is to blame to the extent to which it is complicit.
However, the need for this tax has nothing to do with the deficit that arose during the GFC from the stimulus and other spending packages.
As always Tony Abbott lies to get his way. He really makes Gillard look like Mother Teresa.
_Posted using RoarFEED V.4_
happy_tiger
Well-known member
Well the Reserve Bank is concerned with the Tax
They have said they will cut the interest rates if implemented
They have said they will cut the interest rates if implemented
@southerntiger said:
They have been doing this from day one in government. Every time they make a decision to do something they know the general public will not like, they say they have to do it because of Labor's mistakes. They've been in govt long enough to start to take some responsibility for their own actions.
I was once told that a good sign of whether a company was reputable, and one that could be trusted, was that they took responsibility for their own decisions/actions/mistakes. If they tended to lay the blame elsewhere when something went awry, then STAY AWAY FROM THEM as they lack honesty and integrity. Same principle can be applied to individuals and govt, perhaps moreso.
hammertime
Well-known member
Well that is true. I think Tony's goes a bit far blaming Labor. There is no doubt they did waste some money and create some ineffective policies, but they are hardly to blame for the large portion of the debt.
I don't think you can blame the prior liberals either though, handing tax back is good policy to grow the economy. Family incentives are also good policy to create more tax payers in time for the boomer retirement.
The liberals also were starting to create funds for the future alongside handing the tax back. The GFC was unexpected and you can't blame Labor or the Liberals for that.
I think most people can see through Tony's rubbish now. It's a bit of the boy who cried wolf. Personally, as long as his decisions and actions are right with the information on hand, I really don't care where he is lying blame, what he promised or what he didn't promise.
I don't think you can blame the prior liberals either though, handing tax back is good policy to grow the economy. Family incentives are also good policy to create more tax payers in time for the boomer retirement.
The liberals also were starting to create funds for the future alongside handing the tax back. The GFC was unexpected and you can't blame Labor or the Liberals for that.
I think most people can see through Tony's rubbish now. It's a bit of the boy who cried wolf. Personally, as long as his decisions and actions are right with the information on hand, I really don't care where he is lying blame, what he promised or what he didn't promise.
Blackpearl
New member
well written article by lenore taylor on abbot/libs and austerity proposals. the race to become more americanised is well and truly on, much to ruperts wants. what a bunch of know-all, lying mugs we have running the joint now !
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/01/in-abbotts-team-australia-the-weakest-players-must-do-the-heaviest-lifting
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/01/in-abbotts-team-australia-the-weakest-players-must-do-the-heaviest-lifting
@hammertime said:
It doesn't bother you that someone told a series of lies, made a series of promises he knew he wouldn't keep, while at the same time crapping on and on and on and on about how he'd be an honest and responsible leader, just because he wanted to be prime minister?
Are you the ultimate apologist?
http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/04/30/coalition-hypocrisy-abbott-and-hockey-in-their-own-words/
Tigerdazz2
Well-known member
http://www.smh.com.au/business/google-gets-its-tax-bill-slashed-despite-earning-millions-in-local-profits-20140501-37krm.html
Budget emergency eh Hockey ???
Oh that's right…....the LIBERALS are the party for the FILTHY RICH & BIG BUSINESS.
Remember THIS when you have to pull out BOTH your Medicare and Debit/Credit card when you have to pay up at the DOCTORS !!
Budget emergency eh Hockey ???
Oh that's right…....the LIBERALS are the party for the FILTHY RICH & BIG BUSINESS.
Remember THIS when you have to pull out BOTH your Medicare and Debit/Credit card when you have to pay up at the DOCTORS !!
Tim Sheens
Well-known member
@mremedy said:
I was recalling similar comments from two economists, that without the prior governments changes, the stimulus spending alone would have only caused a deficit in one financial year. One was on Sky Business and the other on news breakfast program.
Whilst both said that the tax cuts were the main reason for our structural deficit, they also cited the middle class welfare program of the Howard government, with one of them particularly scathing of Costello for the "gift to the rich" he had given to high end superannuation.
@formerguest said:
Formerguest, in my experience "tv economists" tend to have extreme views. Things are either really good or really bad. Furthermore, we tend to weight the views of those we agree with higher than those that we disagree with.
In regards to Howard's tax cuts and welfare programs causing all but one of the last 5 deficits, lets look at the numbers and make up our own minds:
According to budget numbers, 2008/2009 income tax receipts fell by $139 million, however company tax receipts fell by $3.9 billion. The 2009/2010 income tax receipts fell by a further $2.6 billion and company tax receipts fell by $8.3 billion.
Over two years income tax fell by $2.8 billion and company tax fell by $12.1 billion.
On the expenditure side social service and welfare increased by $26.7 billion in 2008/2009 but fell by $15.4 billion in 2009/2010\. At the same time unemployment rose from 3.9% in July 2008 to a peak of 6% in February 2010.
The cash budget deficit was $27.1 billion in 2008/2009 and $54.8 billion in 2009/2010.
In the following 3 budgets income tax receipts increased by $13.8 billion, $14.6 billion and $1.3 billion. Company tax receipts increased by $3.6 billion, $9.9 billion and $0.2 billion. Cash budget deficits were $47.7 billion, $43.7 billion and $18.8 billion.
The point of these numbers is to highlight that other factors, such as company tax receipts and a rise in unemployment have also had a significant impact to the budget.
I am interested to hear your views on what a budget deficit/surplus means.
Can anybody tell me what the **economic** meaning of a budget deficit/surplus is? We all know the accounting definition (revenues - expenses), but can anyone tell me what the budget position means to the economy?
Can anybody tell me what the **economic** meaning of a budget deficit/surplus is? We all know the accounting definition (revenues - expenses), but can anyone tell me what the budget position means to the economy?
happy_tiger
Well-known member
I think we are at the stage I thought the Coalition would reach after a year
Abbott has to go and bring Turnbull off the bench
Abbott has to go and bring Turnbull off the bench
@happy tiger said:
Would it really make any difference though Happy? Sure Turnbull is streets ahead of phony Tony in smarts and charisma, but in the end he will still only be enacting the same policies/budget cuts/taxes etc that skinny Tony & Co are trying to implement, under much criticism, now. He would just put a different spin on them to make them appear more acceptable to the public, but in the end the result would still be the same - big business wins, everyone else loses.
happy_tiger
Well-known member
@Flippedy said:
I do actually Flip
I don't think Abbott would listen too much to advisers , he a stubborn bloke from all appearances Flip and he probably thinks he has two elections to get the changes he wants
I reckon if the Coalition think that despite their majority they could be in for a rude shock
Modern voters will change in an instant if they want change
I reckon they have a 3-6 month window to make the change
Abbott did his job well in opposition be he was never going to be a long time or term leader
Just my opinion
@happy tiger said:
You're right Happy, Abbott was never a long term option as PM. In fact, he's already been there longer than I thought he'd be lol. However, I'm still not convinced Turnbull will make all that much difference, apart from presenting himself and the Party in a better light, but we can only hope. Knowing our luck if there's a leadership change we'll probably end up with either Hockey or Pine!
southerntiger
New member
Turnbull will never again be the leader of the parliamentary Liberal Party.
Kevin Rudf has more of a chance.
_Posted using RoarFEED V.4_
Kevin Rudf has more of a chance.
_Posted using RoarFEED V.4_
westTAHger
Well-known member
most dis-appointing aspect about this, is **it just proves you can never trust a politician.**
Blackpearl
New member
interesting article by penny wong in todays guardian. dont let the facts get in the way of lies and broken promises by this nations worst ever prime minister, an unbelievable achievement in only eight months !
\
\
Tony Abbott's budget emergency: what are the facts?
Not one of the prime minister’s claims about the 'budget emergency' stacks up against a simple fact check – and here's the evidence
Penny Wong
theguardian.com, Tuesday 13 May 2014 07.30 AEST
Jump to comments (119)
The 2014 budget papers are printed and packed in Canberra, Sunday, May 11, 2014\. Federal treasurer Joe Hockey will hand down his first budget on Tuesday.
The 2014 budget papers are printed and packed in Canberra. Photograph: Alan Porritt/AAP
It’s difficult to find words to adequately describe the spectacle of the Abbott government setting about hiking income taxes and fuel excise in its first budget. “Beyond belief,” as one of the prime minister’s colleagues quipped, comes close.
From the man who promised no new taxes, and argued that “no country has ever taxed its way to prosperity,” here come the new taxes.
This reveals more than a prime ministerial hypocrisy. It also makes clear the lie that is the “budget emergency.” If the budget were replete with wasteful Labor spending that could be cut, as Tony Abbott kept telling Australians before the election, there would be no need for tax hikes.
The Coalition appeared to believe their political lines actually constituted fiscal policy. But they didn’t, and they won’t. Abbott’s addiction to scare campaigns is well known. From claiming whole cities would be wiped off the map to the budget emergency, facts are sacrificed in pursuit of a political objective. But not one of the prime minister’s claims about the budget stacks up against a simple fact check.
\
\
Claim: Australia has a budget emergency
Nations with budget emergencies don’t receive AAA ratings with a stable outlook from all three credit rating agencies, as Australia did under Labor.
Australia is one of only 10 economies in the world with AAA ratings from all three agencies – in the company of other countries with strong public finances like Germany, Canada, Sweden, Singapore and Switzerland. This status shows our finances are considered to be stronger than those of the vast majority of advanced economies – including the US, the UK, Japan, France and New Zealand.
\
\
Claim: Debt levels are unsustainable
The Australian government has low levels of debt by world standards.
The latest budget update shows net government debt for 2013-14 of $191.5bn, or 12.1% of Australia’s GDP. By contrast, net government debt in advanced economies around the world averages 74.7%, according to the International Monetary Fund.
\
\
Claim: Labor’s deficits were too high
Governments typically run budget surpluses when the economy is strong and deficits when the economy is weak.
Labor allowed the budget to go into deficit in 2008-09 because the global financial crisis was threatening to plunge our economy into recession. Our action stimulated the economy, kept Australia out of recession and supported hundreds of thousands of jobs.
The deficit peaked at $54.5bn, or 4.2% of GDP, in 2009-10 – less than half the advanced country average. Then, as the private sector started recovering, Labor started reducing the deficit. In our last full year in office, 2012-13, the federal deficit was $18.8bn or 1.2% of GDP, compared to an advanced economy average of 4.9%.
Claim: Spending was out of control
In the four years from 2009-10 to 2012-13 Labor met its fiscal rule of keeping real average spending growth to less than 2% a year. In fact, this was the lowest four-year period of real spending growth in 23 years.
The Abbott government arrives at a higher figure for political purposes by including the 2008-09 stimulus – an economic program the Nobel laureate, economist Joseph Stiglitz, has described as one of the “best designed” stimulus packages of any advanced economy.
Claim: Labor increased taxes
Labor was a low-taxing government. During our time in office, federal government receipts averaged 22.5% of GDP. By contrast, under the Howard government, receipts averaged 25% of GDP.
Claim: Debt will reach $667bn by the end of the decade
The budget’s debt and deficit figures have been inflated by Joe Hockey through a combination of spending decisions and changes to economic assumptions, such as unemployment projections. These changes doubled projected budget deficits by $68bn and have also blown out debt figures. These political changes in Budget assumptions were confirmed by Treasury at Senate estimates hearings earlier this year.
By contrast, the independent pre-election economic and fiscal outlook’s medium term projections, using long-standing methodology, show that on Labor’s policy settings the budget surplus grows to 1% of GDP in 2020-21 and net debt returns to zero in 2023-24.
\
\
Claim: Labor’s school and disability reforms are not funded
In the 2013-14, budget labor took the unprecedented step of releasing 10 year figures for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and Gonski school reforms, demonstrating how they were funded over the long term.
The Coalition has reversed a number of these savings measures and now claims these reforms represent a fiscal “time bomb” – this is an obvious attempt to justify breaking Abbott’s election promises on schools and disability.
The result: Labor v the Coalition
It is the case that structural improvements in the budget are needed to ensure key spending is sustainable. That’s why Labor made targeted savings worth more than $180bn over the six Budgets since 2008-09.
Savings like means testing the private health insurance rebate, removing the baby bonus and reforming the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, rather than hiking income tax and cutting benefits to low and middle income families. Treasury analysis shows that the long-term savings made by Labor mean the budget is cumulatively more than $300bn better off by 2020-21.
Political deceit may have provided Abbott with an expedient path to office, but it represents a shaky foundation for responsible economic and Budget management.
\
\
Tony Abbott's budget emergency: what are the facts?
Not one of the prime minister’s claims about the 'budget emergency' stacks up against a simple fact check – and here's the evidence
Penny Wong
theguardian.com, Tuesday 13 May 2014 07.30 AEST
Jump to comments (119)
The 2014 budget papers are printed and packed in Canberra, Sunday, May 11, 2014\. Federal treasurer Joe Hockey will hand down his first budget on Tuesday.
The 2014 budget papers are printed and packed in Canberra. Photograph: Alan Porritt/AAP
It’s difficult to find words to adequately describe the spectacle of the Abbott government setting about hiking income taxes and fuel excise in its first budget. “Beyond belief,” as one of the prime minister’s colleagues quipped, comes close.
From the man who promised no new taxes, and argued that “no country has ever taxed its way to prosperity,” here come the new taxes.
This reveals more than a prime ministerial hypocrisy. It also makes clear the lie that is the “budget emergency.” If the budget were replete with wasteful Labor spending that could be cut, as Tony Abbott kept telling Australians before the election, there would be no need for tax hikes.
The Coalition appeared to believe their political lines actually constituted fiscal policy. But they didn’t, and they won’t. Abbott’s addiction to scare campaigns is well known. From claiming whole cities would be wiped off the map to the budget emergency, facts are sacrificed in pursuit of a political objective. But not one of the prime minister’s claims about the budget stacks up against a simple fact check.
\
\
Claim: Australia has a budget emergency
Nations with budget emergencies don’t receive AAA ratings with a stable outlook from all three credit rating agencies, as Australia did under Labor.
Australia is one of only 10 economies in the world with AAA ratings from all three agencies – in the company of other countries with strong public finances like Germany, Canada, Sweden, Singapore and Switzerland. This status shows our finances are considered to be stronger than those of the vast majority of advanced economies – including the US, the UK, Japan, France and New Zealand.
\
\
Claim: Debt levels are unsustainable
The Australian government has low levels of debt by world standards.
The latest budget update shows net government debt for 2013-14 of $191.5bn, or 12.1% of Australia’s GDP. By contrast, net government debt in advanced economies around the world averages 74.7%, according to the International Monetary Fund.
\
\
Claim: Labor’s deficits were too high
Governments typically run budget surpluses when the economy is strong and deficits when the economy is weak.
Labor allowed the budget to go into deficit in 2008-09 because the global financial crisis was threatening to plunge our economy into recession. Our action stimulated the economy, kept Australia out of recession and supported hundreds of thousands of jobs.
The deficit peaked at $54.5bn, or 4.2% of GDP, in 2009-10 – less than half the advanced country average. Then, as the private sector started recovering, Labor started reducing the deficit. In our last full year in office, 2012-13, the federal deficit was $18.8bn or 1.2% of GDP, compared to an advanced economy average of 4.9%.
Claim: Spending was out of control
In the four years from 2009-10 to 2012-13 Labor met its fiscal rule of keeping real average spending growth to less than 2% a year. In fact, this was the lowest four-year period of real spending growth in 23 years.
The Abbott government arrives at a higher figure for political purposes by including the 2008-09 stimulus – an economic program the Nobel laureate, economist Joseph Stiglitz, has described as one of the “best designed” stimulus packages of any advanced economy.
Claim: Labor increased taxes
Labor was a low-taxing government. During our time in office, federal government receipts averaged 22.5% of GDP. By contrast, under the Howard government, receipts averaged 25% of GDP.
Claim: Debt will reach $667bn by the end of the decade
The budget’s debt and deficit figures have been inflated by Joe Hockey through a combination of spending decisions and changes to economic assumptions, such as unemployment projections. These changes doubled projected budget deficits by $68bn and have also blown out debt figures. These political changes in Budget assumptions were confirmed by Treasury at Senate estimates hearings earlier this year.
By contrast, the independent pre-election economic and fiscal outlook’s medium term projections, using long-standing methodology, show that on Labor’s policy settings the budget surplus grows to 1% of GDP in 2020-21 and net debt returns to zero in 2023-24.
\
\
Claim: Labor’s school and disability reforms are not funded
In the 2013-14, budget labor took the unprecedented step of releasing 10 year figures for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and Gonski school reforms, demonstrating how they were funded over the long term.
The Coalition has reversed a number of these savings measures and now claims these reforms represent a fiscal “time bomb” – this is an obvious attempt to justify breaking Abbott’s election promises on schools and disability.
The result: Labor v the Coalition
It is the case that structural improvements in the budget are needed to ensure key spending is sustainable. That’s why Labor made targeted savings worth more than $180bn over the six Budgets since 2008-09.
Savings like means testing the private health insurance rebate, removing the baby bonus and reforming the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, rather than hiking income tax and cutting benefits to low and middle income families. Treasury analysis shows that the long-term savings made by Labor mean the budget is cumulatively more than $300bn better off by 2020-21.
Political deceit may have provided Abbott with an expedient path to office, but it represents a shaky foundation for responsible economic and Budget management.
Tiger_Watto
New member
rubbish article by the previous finance department which created this problem…
- Status
Staff online
-
DempsModerator