The ALP is hitting Australia with record levels of Government Debt

Could well have been some dodgy sh!t going on but but people still hinge their investments on this agency, due to the fact that most of their analysis and reporting was obviously credible. It is a twisted web of speculation, however, it does not detract from the fact that whilst under intense scrutiny Australia received a triple A rating from the three top credit rating agencies. Look labor took up government at a time of world wide upheaval in the financial market. We should be celebrating these feats not deploring them.

Common dumb, our economy is healthy in context of the world wide recession that we were fortunate to escape as a consequence of prudent governance. We are not separate from world wide markets, so there had to be an impact!

In your own mind people are concerned about it. It never enters conversations in my circles, it obviously does in yours because it is what seemingly engulfs your life. How could people not escape it around you. You started out like a steam train going downhill on the issue and for you to pull up quickly on the issue would cause a major catastrophe in your credibility!

Dumb, you are over exaggerating again. A substantial amount of funding goes into renewable energy. The government has been explicit with the allocation of these funds and I think you know the facts, but hey, don't let truth get in the way of a good story!!

It is a super profits tax for goodness sake! If they ain't making money over the specified threshold then that can't be helped, especially in light of the worlds economy and consequently commodity prices.....this is also a given. If they received billions, you would have been saying they are destroying the industry and our economy. Common, don't start moving the goal posts!

 

We're paying quite a bit less taxes than we were under Howard.

 

There was dodgy sh!t as the following shows

US slaps $US5b lawsuit on S&P over GFC
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/worl...sp-over-gfc-20130206-2dx5p.html#ixzz2L6y20OyS
http://www.smh.com.au/business/worl...5b-lawsuit-on-sp-over-gfc-20130206-2dx5p.html

Closer to home - New South Wales councils class action against S&P.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-05/councils-to-recoup-gfc-loses-after-court-ruling/4353000

Like i said these companies give their OPINION nothing is guaranteed, so they could be miles out like for instance those Credit Default Swaps they rated AAA and brought the whole world's economy down.

Would you trust their opinion???

World debt clock
http://www.economist.com/content/global_debt_clock

According to that clock above our debt is no better of than the European countries who are in deep sh!t.

Australia owes = $395,469,672,131

Greece owes = $397,954,644,809

Ireland owes = $232,376,775,956

Portugal owes = $266,768,579,235

Imo the only thing that keeps our triple A rating is mining/oil & gas sectors.

In my circles it does cause the GFC directly affects my industry, believe me i'm not the only one talking about it. Lets just hope we pull out of all this relatively unscathed.

I know they are allocating money for green energy but will it amount to something or will it be money flushed straight down the dunny.

I'm all for the mining tax like i keep saying it should be a 60 40 split of the profits.

BHP billiton made $25 billion profit last year, under this rule our government would get $10 billion and BHP billiton $15 billion.

Hell dude why should our wealth only be enjoyed by a few people at the top, eg. top dogs at BHP billiton.

Its our wealth their mining we should share in it too and imo if they dont like it they can fark off and our government can take over and get 100% of the profits.

Now as for the carbon tax its a scam to fleece our nation and its people, its financial slavery to overseas institutions and corporations for ever man woman and child in Australia,

 

Australia:
Population:23 million
GDP: $1.5 trillion

Greece:
Pop: 11 million
GDP: $255 billion

Ireland
Pop: 4.5 million
GDP: $128 billion

Portugal
Pop: 10.5m
GDP: $211b


Shall we keep comparing apples and oranges and pretend they're the same thing?

 

I have a family of four i owe the bank $250,000

250,000/4 = $62,500 per head of my family

You have a family of three you owe the bank $150,000

150,000/3 = $50,000 per head of you family.

SO what???????

You still owe the money no matter how you cut it.

What am i going to get my wife and kids to work of their $62,000 debt each.

Meanigless statistics cannot detract from the bottom line which is you and i owe money.

Ok maybe i should look at incomes too

I earn $300,000 dollars

300,000/4 = $75000 per head of family

You earn $200,000 dollars

200,000/3 = $66,666 pre head of family

Does this make it somehow ok because we earn more than we owe.

SO what about these statistcs

The bottom line is you owe MONEY.
.

 

You can not be serious. You're either trolling or ignorant of this.

 

Dude i'm not trolling.

These statistics maybe how econosmists view the world but it really tells nothing about the life style of the people in those countries.

For example even though we have a much higher GDP per capita per head in Australia than for example Greece.

It doesn't tell you that the cost of living in Sydney or Melbourne is much much higher than living in Athens.

In the end even though we may have a higher GDP per capita our lifestyles maybe less than other countries that have a lower GDP per capita!

It tells you nothing about the cost of living and how wealth is ditributed in that nation.

 

The nsw lawsuit is not a separate issue from the US government lawsuit. It all had to do with the GFC, which I had already stated is yet to be concluded in the courts. Again, they have been around for 150 years, they must have given pretty good advice in that time. Look, I reckon there was some dodgy sh!t going on because of the relatively easy process of Credit Default Swaps. It was a gigantic loophole that cried out: Come and get me, if you don't others will!

Absolutely, but wouldn't touch anything they rate that is linked to easy credit. That is as simple as the issue is. This was not regulated, surely someone in the bush government would have seen the writing on the wall years before this happened and closed this loophole!

Again, these figures need to be shown in context, which panzer has demonstrated in his following post to this one.

If we didn't have mining, iron ore and gas we wouldn't have made the amount of money we have and therefore obviously not the debt we have. Let's celebrate the fact that we have this industry, WHY on earth do you use it as a negative. Of course governments would have had to do things differently in different circumstances. This is such a silly argument dumb.

Of course, in my circles people talk about the impacts of the GFC, but no one sits around talking about the carbon price. This is what I was talking about. The GFC can't be helped by the government.

Dumb, if you are supportive of it, why aren't you confronting the issue of the libs banging on about ruining Australia's biggest industries. There has to be something special about our natural resources in terms of quality and the reason why they want it, which I think is the case. There are many other countries with coal deposits larger than ours, but not to the quality of ours I remember reading a while ago, so I don't think they will be rushing to purchase anywhere else despite the supposed threats.

In your opinion and those that deny climate change because it is in their best interest to oppose every effort concerning AGW. There is so much information on the internet from opposing sides, but if you're not a conspiracy theorist on everything then you tend to trust notable bodies and the majority of climate scientists. The sceptical scientists do not deny climate change dumb and certainly do not rule out AGW, they are simply unsure from their research.

 

Yes, the S&P noted that one of the concerns regarding Australia was it's high personal debt. I mean these are facts dumb, that under the Howard government personal debt shot through the roof. It was just open slather policy by this government that many economist and people on the street could see wasn't going to be sustainable. It wasn't rocket science. The Howard government sold $70 billion of Australia's assets, taxed the r's off us and did nothing to build our nation but to simply put money into the future funds for superannuation for the public servants. Everyone thought and still thinks that this money was put away for the future of the nation....common!!!

People were flying high and Australians were caught out through short term policies and getting up to their necks in debt. Howard was about himself and power, he wasn't innocent little ole johnny boy. He was a deceitful little man with the pretentious mannerisms of the nice old gentleman down the road that would share the fruits of labour from his little veggie patch in his back yard with his neighbours.

 

I never said it was a seperate issue it all has to do with credit rating agencies and the GFC.

And yet hardly anyone has gone to jail for fraud.

The point i'm trying to make still stands these credit rating agencies should taken with a pinch of salt when it comes to dishing out ratings of any kind.

I mean if countries in the european union have been down graded where does that leave the US?...they should be rated a Z in accordance with there debt.

So when they turn around and say Australia has a AAA rating does it really mean anything?

I find it hard to believe that Bush and his henchmen didn't know what was going on.

Just like here in Australia and all over the world the elite where pushing up the price of realestate/housing making it harder for the average man to fulfil his ambition of owining his own home the vechile was CDS.

When i first went to buy my own home in the early 80's they even wanted to know what color my jocks where.

Deregulation is gateway for the rich and elite to control every aspect of our lives, thats everything.

Economic gargon for economists it has no real worth in the real world.

You sound like you like sitting on the fence, if you are for the carbon tax then surely you must be against mining - oil & gas which is what sustains us through these hard times.

How am i using it as a negative i was pointing out that GDP per capita statistics are more or less meanigless.

Governments doing things diffentely you mean like Gillard finding a surplus and turining into a deficit?

But labor always does that and the fact that i voted for her because she promised there would be no carbon tax is why i have changed my colors maybe for good or until Abbott wants us to work for a bowl of rice like in thrid world countries or tries to make us work 16 hour days for less pay or something else along those lines.

You cannot talk about one without talking about the other, the GFC impacts on your pocket but so does the carbon tax, so if you talk about the well being of yourself or your family or your nation you cannot ignore one thing just because you may favour it.

Remember the carbon tax will increase 2.5% above inflation for the next 3 years, businesses who get slugged with higher rates will add this cost onto the goods and services they deliver, meaning that your buying power will keep on deminishing, unless Abbott saves us all from this financial slavery.

I dont really care about parties anymore what i'm interested in is whats good for me and my country and the carbon tax is the worst thing that could have happened to our nation.

I support the mining tax i know the libs dont, i know the libs support big business over the average worker (work choices) proved that, but i'm willing to vote for them on the only ground that they will repeal the carbon tax.

Abbott will also repeal the mining tax this will not hurt the mining companies its what they want, so how will they ruin the biggest industries.

Yeah i'll tell you whats special about our resources we are closer to China than South America is.

I have always said that climate change is real and part of the Earth's natural cycle, othrwise we would still be a piece of molten rock and lava, how did we get to here?...with climate change.

Climate change is always happening you cannot make climate change stand still, it will always fluctuate from cooler to warmer in accordance the temperment of our sun and our orbit around it.

I have read both sides of the arguement and have come to the conclusion that if the science was settled there wouldnt be thousands of scientists around the world disputing it.

If the science was settled it would be hung out like dogs balls for all to see, there would be no need for secrecy or consensus.or to miss lead the public.

If the science was settled we would have proof that AGW is real.

 

Abbott is not going to get rid of the carbon tax. Abbott is against the polluting business paying the tax and instead wants the Australian tax payers to pay for the carbon industry pumps into the air. There will be no incentive for businesses to reduce their carbon footprint because they won't be the ones footing the bill for it.

 

What the hell are you talking about?

Australia's household debt as a percentage of disposable income sky rocketed because house prices sky rocketed under the Howard government, remember those elite pricks who through fraud pushed up housing and real estate all over the world only to have it come crashing down.

The main reason is because housing sky rocketed an Howard had a surplus which gave consumers confidence in spending money.

You also might want to ask that wanker Keating about the recession we had to have.

You know interest housing rates where around 18% can you imagine this compared to todays 5% to 6%.

Are you kidding me so the carbon tax isn't going to tax the shirt of your back then?...The Gillard government has added more taxes for the Australian tax payer than almost any other government in our history.

Hey if you talk about super non of us are getting a good deal, super should be guaranteed and not taxed as far as i'm concened, knowing my luck we'll have another GFC just before i'm going to retire and poof there goes my super.

If Howard sold them it was that stupid cant Keating that started it or put the idea in his head, again what are you talking about?

You know you should look past party politics and see what would be the best for you as an individual and the best for your nation.

There is no other way today, towing party policies is best left to the politicians.

.

 

Hey tank

I heard Abbotts policy is as simply as planting more trees which will go a heck of a long way in reducing CO2 in our atmosphere compared to trading carbon credits on wall street.

 

They need advice from somewhere, maybe they could ask Ian McDonald?

People try to say that Bush and his government weren't responsible....come on this would have been a red flag to a bull, so totally agree with you on this one.

The vehicle in Australia wasn't CDS to the extent in the US, it was the first home buyers grant and negative gearing. Should have alternatively suspended each but obviously given first home buyers first dibs. Running them simultaneously caused a huge rush to the market and first home buyers were being priced out or ended up with inflated prices that many struggled to pay back.

Agree with much of this.

So, it wouldn't matter if we had the same debt per GDP ratio as Japan, which sits at 175%! Would this concern you? Of course it would, stop playing silly buggars again Dumb!

Not sitting on the fence, I just don't believe an ets will have the affect that you say. In any instance, we need the structure to start the process of dealing with our contribution to climate change.

But she never ruled out an ETS dumb, of which Abbott, howard and Costello were fully supportive of. So you really think that the direct action plan won't have any impact on us then?

Of course you can talk about one and not the other. The carbon price was nothing but a scare campaign that has sizzled out. The world is feeling the consequences of the GFC and hard as is quite obvious.

Look everybody will be joining an ETS soon as is indicated by the US. We are extremely fortunate that we joined when we did.

I disagree. Every living economist said that Abbott's Direct Action Plan was the most costly, which evidently had zip support. You can vote for this if you like, but I'm sure Abbott will come up with some excuse to stay with an ETS....mark my words!!! The US looks likely, which would mean we would be silly to drop it and Abbott knows it.

That's your choice to vote for who you like. We can only go with what is feasible to us as individuals, you would just hope that a majority of us get it right.

Of course, he will just increase our taxes like good old johnny did. Howards tax per GDP reached 25%, labor haven't even reache 22% yet, which is still lower than howards lowest. Each 0.1% increase represents $1.5billion. Labor are not the taxing government that the libs make out, but again the media don't help out with the truth of those sitting on the left of politics.

Wait up, Russia has mountains and mountains of it. Vladamir Putin might be a closet greenie!

The system is much more complex than a non scientific minds could comprehend. I mean either side could put whatever spin on it they want. I happen to believe in it for various reasons as has been stated many times before.

 

They were similar sh!t

If you find value in it to go out and decide where to live or what countries are best compared to others then thats your problem.

I'm all for grass roots reality, like my thoughts on the curbing of CO2 emissions.

fair enough you dont believe but you will certainely feel it.

Can you read ENGLISH then read this and tell me its meaning,

So whats going to burn a bigger hole in your pocket the GFC or the carbon tax?

You mean that broken down system that the European Union is trying to patch together before its carbon crdit bonds hit rock bottom and are reduced to having no value at all.

Btw why are we paying $23 tonne. while the EU only pays $5 tonne

You do know that the EU sends up 14% of all manmade CO2 emissions.

Australia sends up 1.5% of all manade CO2 emissions yet we are paying nearly 5 times as much, have you a theory on this one?......maybe i can help you along.

Hhhhhmmmmm.......Is she working for Australia or international bankers??????????????????/

I think the only thing Abbott will implement will be to plant more trees and like i saidto tank this will go a hell of a long way in reducing the CO2 in our atmosphere than trading carbon credits on wall street anyday of the week.

You dont honestly think Gillard can win do you????

I'll be there with my slab and some chips or maybe even popcorn watching her fat arse dissapear for ever.

But Swan is set to increase our taxes to make up the short fall in his surplus isn't he, which will be the final nail in the labor coffin.

Dude you really have to stop towing party policies it will enable you to zoom around and see the whole picture.

 

Under Howard as treasurer, inflation was sky rocketing and interest rates reached 21%. People forget this so easily. Howard reached surpluses by being the highest taxing government, refusing to invest in our infrastructure and sold our *******mmnnn assets to the tune of $70 billion.

The recession we had to have was proven to be absolutely necessary in retrospect. Things were on the improve before keating left office and little old johnny had the fortune of jumping on the back of that and the massive mining boom. The Howard government failed to implement policies with long term goals, he was simply about staying elected for as long as he could. He wouldn't dammmn give up the spot despite many agreements with Costello. The guy was a little deceptive, lying ego-centric! I'm guilty of voting for him the first time, but not after that. There was too much dodgy sh!t under his governance that the media failed to hold him accountable for despite the efforts of "No Guts" Beasley....obviously I say that figuratively.

The Gillard government has added more taxes for the Australian tax payer than almost any other government in our history. This is utter bulls!t dumb, and I think you know it. Post something credible that supports this!

If Howard sold them it was that stupid cant Keating that started it or put the idea in his head, again what are you talking about? Howard went like a crazy man. Keatings sales were like that of a little corner store compared to a woolworths chain.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_income_tax#Personal_Income_Tax
Income tax now.

http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.aspx?doc=/Content/73969.htm
Income tax in previous years.


Mmmmm, looks like the ALP has reduced income taxes a lot.

 

Give the ALP another term and we`d be well on the way towards being a zero tax country.

 

We could do it too. Let's say we did stop paying all Federal taxes but the Federal Budget remained the same. We would still have a smaller debt (yes, debt to GDP) than most of the OECD even after a year of the Federal Government taking in no taxes. In fact, we could do it for a few years before we caught up.

That's how small our debt actually is.

 

And yet the ALP has racked up the biggest debt in our history...

 

Australia had a highest ever interest rate of 17.5% in January 1990. Under and ALP government. Not under Howard as treasurer or Prime Minister.

 

Nope, the highest interest rates were when Howard was the Treasurer.

 

Really ?

Show me.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Howard#Federal_Treasurer_.281977.E2.80.931983.29

I'm lazy and high on pain killers so that'll have to do. It's one of the facts that the Liberal Party avoids talking about when they talk about interests rates under the ALP.

 

Anybody who cares to look at the Reserve Bank's records of government interest rates from the past few decades would find very different results. What John Howard did not want to admit then, and still continues to hide, is that when he was the treasurer in the Fraser government the interest rate was as high as 21.4 per cent - in April 1982. To use Mr Howard's own words "that is not a scare tactic, it is a fact".

The highest interest rates from 1982 were: Fraser government (when Mr Howard was treasurer), 21.4 per cent in April 1982; Hawke government, 19 per cent in December 1985 and Keating government, 7.9 per cent in December 1994. http://www.smh.com.au/news/letters/...and-john-howard/2007/10/04/1191091271442.html

This would make an interesting analysis!

Figure 1: Economic growth
Average per capita growth rates (percentage per annum) during period of each government