"THE nation's tourism sector has slammed the Rudd Government for not coming to the aid of the struggling industry despite giving billions to the car industry, saying they were placed at the "back of the line" because they did not have union backing.

The attack came as figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics yesterday showed the number of foreign visitors to Australia plummeted 5.1 per cent in November compared to the previous year.

The number of travellers heading overseas outstripped the number of foreign visitors to the country by more than 35,000 -- the biggest tourist deficit in 23years.

Industry leaders, due to meet informally today with staff from Tourism Minister Martin Ferguson's office, yesterday said an economic assistance package was essential to head off major job losses.

Australian Tourism Export Council managing director Matthew Hingerty said: "It (tourism industry assistance) is going to cost the taxpayer significantly less than the car industry funding package.

"But there's a pattern emerging here, and that is if you're an industry backed by a large unionised workforce, you can expect assistance -- otherwise you're at the back of the line."

Kevin Rudd announced a $6.2billion assistance package for the car industry in November.

Mr Hingerty said he was "taken aback" by the sharp drop-off in overseas visitors, which was more dramatic than expected. He said forecasts pointed to a further 4.2 per cent slump in foreign visitors this year, which represented a $1billion fall in export revenue, or 200,000 visitors.

Since a peak in July, the number of visitors in November from the US dropped 9.5 per cent, from Japan 14.1 per cent, China 9.7 per cent and Singapore 10.1 per cent, in seasonally adjusted terms. ......"

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24904670-2702,00.html

PROMISED tax cuts could be brought forward a year as the Rudd Government considers options for a second emergency package to counter the worsening global economy.

Wayne Swan said yesterday the Government was determined to do all it could to strengthen the economy in the face of the international crisis.

"We are certainly all in this together - Australian families, businesses large and small and the Rudd Government - and we stand ready to take more decisive action should the international situation deteriorate further," the Treasurer said.

The Government is in the process of spending $10.4 billion, with payments to pensioners, families and carers, and increasing the first-home buyers grant.

However, it is coming under pressure from the International Monetary Fund to do more, and both the domestic and international oulooks have darkened since the first stimulus package was unveiled in October.

The recession in the US is becoming increasingly severe, with 550,000 people losing their jobs last month, pushing the unemployment rate to a 16-year high of 7.2 per cent.

The employment outlook in Australia is also getting worse. The ANZ's monthly survey of job advertisements shows a 9.7 per cent fall in December alone, with the number of jobs on offer falling by 27.2 per cent since July.

The ANZ's head of Australian economics, Warren Hogan, said the pace of decline was consistent with a recession over the next nine months and suggested rising unemployment that would last for several years.

He said the collapse of job advertisements meant the Government's budget position was weakening faster than it forecast in its budget update last November, which tipped the unemployment rate to rise to 5 per cent.

"We expect to see an upward revision to the official unemployment forecast in the May budget resulting in a further deterioration in the Government's financial position," he said.

A tax cut of $3.4 billion is locked in from July 1 and it is possible the Government may bring forward a further $4.5 billion in tax cuts presently planned for the middle of next year.

The tax cuts planned both this year and next involve lifting the threshold at which the 30c-in-the-dollar tax rate cuts in, from $34,000 to $37,000, and lifting the threshold for the low-income tax offset from $14,000 to $16,000. People earning less than this will pay no tax, while people earning up to $67,500 will have some entitlement to the low-income tax offset.

Mr Swan's office would not comment specifically on the IMF's suggestions for increased budget stimulus or on the options it was considering.

Economists believe the budget is already on course to run a deficit next year, with estimates ranging from $5billion to $25 billion. The Government's last budget update predicted a small surplus.

Macquarie Bank senior economist Brian Redican said there was a strong case for the Government to boost spending, even if it pushed the deficit to 2 per cent of GDP (or $25 billion).

"There is scope to bring forward the tax cuts due for 2010-11, and the politicians will be thinking very hard about what they could do to lift the housing construction market," he said.

He said one-off payments to the unemployed would also be an option for the Government, as these would be rapidly reinjected back into the economy with additional spending.

The IMF has set a global goal for budget stimulus packages to total 2 per cent of global GDP, but it wants nations with strong budgetary positions, such as Australia, to do more. ........"


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24904684-601,00.html

The world is under pressure sprint, but as the song goes, we're all in this together.

skippy - I feel aussie has not felt the sting of recession yet.


"MALCOLM Turnbull has backed calls to bring forward tax cuts to stimulate the economy.

The Opposition Leader, who criticised the Government's stimulus package involving cash handouts last year as a "sugar hit", said today that tax cuts remained the best way to keep the economy ticking over.

"We argued last year that tax cuts should be brought forward," he said today.

"That is the best way to promote business activity which of course encourages people to take on employees, retain employees, invest, take risks - all those decisions that keep the wheels of industry moving."

Mr Turnbull said he would "weigh up" the need for further tax cuts. He has commissioned a major review of tax policy that is being conducted for the Opposition by economist Henry Ergas. The Coalition is also expected to hold a tax summit later this year."


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24906369-601,00.html

Finally, the opposition has grown some balls. Tax cuts are a much better option than handouts.

freediver wrote on Jan 13^th, 2009 at 11:43am:

Finally, the opposition has grown some balls. Tax cuts are a much better option than handouts.

Only if you pay tax, people on benifits dont, so how do tax cuts help pensioners ?

It is better for the economy and the country as a whole. Obviously the people who would have gotten a handout are likely to be worse off.

freediver wrote on Jan 13^th, 2009 at 12:20pm:

It is better for the economy and the country as a whole. Obviously the people who would have gotten a handout are likely to be worse off.

I agree tax cuts are a good idea what I dont agree with is that hand outs are bad, I think both have their place.

The money has to come from somewhere. Any handout requires you to either increase tax or forgo a tax cut. You can't have both. You have to choose.

freediver wrote on Jan 13^th, 2009 at 12:54pm:

The money has to come from somewhere. Any handout requires you to either increase tax or forgo a tax cut. You can't have both. You have to choose.

No it dosn't, the handout before xmas saw neither of those things occur.
IE, no tax cuts cancelled and no rises in tax.

Cancelling a tax cut is not the same thing as forgoing one. Just because the government doesn't announe in the same package "BTW we could have cut taxes but decided on this handout instead, so suck on that wage earners!" does not mean there is no choice. Money doesn't grow on trees. The choice is real. The government just tries to hide it from you. It's like you are pretending that the purchase of an expensive new car won't mean you have to forgo some other purchase. There is always a choice. This is the most fundamental choice in government taxation and expenditure.

wrote on Jan 13^th, 2009 at 11:22am:

The world is under pressure sprint, but as the song goes, we're all in this together.

I want to put a bullet in Ben Lee's brain.

Tax cuts give a very low bang for the buck. "Handouts" are better as are govt spending, esp on economic infrastructure.

Have a look at P. Krugman's blog in the NYT.

Hmmm and no amount of spending on advertising tourism etc is going to bring tourists from countries evn further into recession than us.

Geez, why don't some [eople think b4 posting?

Quote:

"AUSTRALIA'S economy will "unwind scarily fast" this year with Treasurer Wayne Swan forced to choose between middle-class welfare and industry bailouts, a report claims. Leading economic forecaster Access Economics warns in its quarterly Business Outlook, released today, that the nation's economic boom will , halving corporate profits, costing more than 300,000 people their jobs and blowing out the current account deficit to more than $100 billion. "Batten the hatches. This is not just a recession. This is the sharpest deceleration Australia's economy has ever seen," the report says. Thanks to China's growth, Australia last year escaped the recessions that sent major economies such as the US and Britain into reverse. The Government has consistently talked up the economy's prospects for 2009, citing Treasury forecasts of 2 per cent growth in 2008-09. But yesterday Wayne Swan acknowledged there was "no point gilding the lily in any way". "The year ahead will be tough, and there's no quick fix," the Treasurer said. The Access Economics report is the latest to challenge the Treasury forecasts for the Australian economy, released in November, before the full extent of China's slowdown became apparent. In an interview with The Weekend Australian, Mr Swan conceded neither the budget nor the economy would meet the official published forecasts. "China and other emerging economies, now caught up in this crisis, are expected to slow much more sharply than previously anticipated," he said yesterday. Access Economics director Chris Richardson said Mr Swan would already have more updated, unpublished Treasury forecasts that exposed the extent of the problems facing his budget. "The Government knows how ugly things are. None of this is a surprise to them," he said. Access Economics said the federal budget was "buggered" because of its heavy reliance on company taxes and royalties - both of which would be hit hard by the collapse in commodity prices. "The glory days of big budget surpluses are over, and the feds are now staring down the barrel of deficits as far as the eye can see," its outlook says. The total public sector deficit - which combines federal, state and local government balances - is forecast to blow out to $10.5 billion this financial year, mostly due to Canberra's stimulus package. But while Mr Swan may be able to rein in that deficit in 2009-10, the reprieve will be shortlived. Access Economics predicts that in the following year commodity price falls will exact a $22.8 billion toll from total government finances, which are dominated by the federal budget. The national fiscal deficit could blow out to $29.4 billion in 2011-12. Such a shortfall could cripple the Government's capacity to deliver promised tax cuts, maintain programs, cushion the cost of its emissions trading scheme and fund infrastructure spending plans. Access Economics warns that the Government and Opposition could "freeze in the headlights" as a result, choosing to shore up existing handouts to the middle class and to the car industry rather than making the politically difficult decision to cut them in favour of more worthy uses, such as building infrastructure.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24930554-952,00.html



Unbelievable.
ALP been in less than a year, are already claiming "poverty, doom, gloom, broke"

Quote:

..as a result, choosing to shore up existing handouts to the middle class and to the car industry rather than making the politically difficult decision to cut them in favour of more worthy uses, such as building infrastructure.

Well supplies supplies. Everybody has bought enough Chinese junk.

Howard was a complete tightass with infrastructure when things were booming. And his "false boom" was only fueled by ridiculous overspending and overborrowing whilst simultaneously strangling working conditions. What a twit he was.

What a potato head he is.
If it is looking so dire now, the surplus he gave away willy nilly last year would have been especially good to have in the bank.
Anyone here had cash in their pocket when others are broke ?
GOOD situation to be in.

This has been brewing for years, rudds a reactive micromanager.







Quote:

PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd has warned that economic conditions will rapidly worsen this year - and blamed "a culture of greed" for the looming crisis. Fresh from a holiday, Mr Rudd returned to work on Monday with the economy on his mind. He told an Australia Day reception at Kirribilli House that 2009 was going to be tough. "Things will get worse before they get better," he said. "The magnitude of the global financial crisis almost beggars belief." The economic turmoil was the worst the world had seen since the Great Depression of 1931, Mr Rudd said. He promised to be tough himself. "We will govern with a combination of steely economic management and compassion for those who need support." Mr Rudd blamed greed for the crisis. "A culture of excessive risk taking - a culture of greed - a culture of excess has brought massive economic disruption to global financial markets and the global economy." Those markets had been inadequately supervised and the world had to develop warning systems to prevent it all happening again, Mr Rudd said. He asked bosses to do everything they could to avoid sacking workers. And he asked workers not to ask for big pay rises. "We are all in this together: business, unions, governments, the community sector and every nation in the world."

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24936500-952,00.html

Actually sprint the handouts last year when the global crisis hit made sense from a macroeconomic perspective. It was the handouts that Howard gave, when the economy was 'overheated' that were bad.

Amadd wrote on Jan 19^th, 2009 at 7:53pm:

Quote: ..as a result, choosing to shore up existing handouts to the middle class and to the car industry rather than making the politically difficult decision to cut them in favour of more worthy uses, such as building infrastructure.   Well supplies supplies. Everybody has bought enough Chinese junk. Howard was a complete tightass with infrastructure when things were booming. And his "false boom" was only fueled by ridiculous overspending and overborrowing whilst simultaneously strangling working conditions. What a twit he was.

And yet he left $20billion plus in the kitty, which this lot have managed to flush down the toilet in less than 12 months.
Re working conditions, Heather Ridout, CE of the Aust Ind Group, and advisor to the govt,  has stated that the changes being implemented by the current govt, are bad for employment in the current climate.

actually f/d , the financial is yet to hit our shores.
$10 billion in the bank now is worth substantially more than it was last year.
To give away $20 billion last year is looking a worse decision on a monthly basis now.

Quote:

$10 billion in the bank now is worth substantially more than it was last year.

No it's not.  With our very low dollar and low interest rates - it's worth a lot less now.  Better to spend it than have it dwindle down to nothing which is what's happening to savings at present.

Rudd took a gamble - it may not have been the best, but it wasn't as bad as Howard's porkbarrelling over the years.

All that money the coalition had - and nothing to show for it.

Quote:

actually f/d , the financial is yet to hit our shores.

That is partly because of Rudd's actions.

f/d - i feel it was due to our resources.
Now those prices have fallen, so superrudd had better mightily support those too !!!





Quote:

TWO days after the Prime Minister asked workers to hold off wage demands, it has emerged two of his highest-paid advisers have been awarded secret bonus payments. Kevin Rudd personally intervened to pay a salary bonus to 29-year-old chief of staff Alister Jordan, his long-serving confidant. Rudd attacks 'culture of greed' Another senior adviser has also breached the Government's official salary cap, with his "principal adviser" salary boosted beyond the top level of $192,000. Mr Jordan, who has worked side-by-side with Mr Rudd for six years, is one of four Government advisers paid at the top "principal adviser" level. With superannuation and overtime added to salaries, principal advisers earn close to $250,000 a year............

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24942045-952,00.html


As that song goes "The rich get richer and the poor get the picture ...."
Who sung that again, what has happened to him .
Wait a second, you've been had !!!

Quote:

PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd has warned that economic conditions will rapidly worsen this year - and blamed "a culture of greed" for the looming crisis.

I agree, it's a culture of greed that has gotten us into this mess in the first place.
The "boom" that we had was merely a credit boom.
Howard (government) continued to sell of assets and got the government debt into surplus, but as Keating said, "they're just moving the pea around under the shells".
Another so-called aim of the Libs was to reduce foreign debt. We all know what happened there, and we should all know the consequences of it.

Tax cuts to the rich, a blowout in housing prices, banks offering money hand over fist to people with huge mortgages, CEO's on obscene salaries, serfchoices...it was all a recipe for disaster.

And now that the disaster is hitting (as it was in the last six months of the Libs) there's still people who try to blame our present government for this mess.
This country is in debt so far that we can't even pay the interest.

Quote:

ALTHOUGH the details of the Government's proposed lending facility for commercial property are not yet known, it is fair to say that what is known raises more questions than answers. At its simplest, why would supporting loans to developers of shopping centres and other forms of commercial property be a particular priority of policy? The vast bulk of loans relate to assets that already exist or are at advanced stages of development. When commercial property prices fall, the owners of those assets take a loss, while the purchasers of the assets, and the assets' users (that is, tenants) make a gain. As revenues from the buildings almost invariably continue to exceed the buildings' operating costs, the assets continue to be operated, so the real flow of services to the economy is unchanged. Obviously, reductions in commercial property prices force banks to write down the value of their property investments. In practice, the impacts are likely to be very small, as most of the banks' commercial property loans have been securitised and are no longer on the banks' books. But even putting that aside, any such impacts are no different from those that occur when prices fall for the many other asset classes that banks have invested in or relied upon as collateral. Should the result threaten the adequacy of banks' capital base, the right policy response is to facilitate the banks' recapitalisation, rather than artificially propping up the price of one particular kind of asset. Directly facilitating recapitalisation would be far more transparent and far less distorting of the pattern of asset prices in the economy as a whole. With commercial property accounting for some 12 per cent of the investments made by Australian super funds, reductions in commercial property prices would also have an impact on the funds and especially on those that have been negligent or tardy in writing down the value of their property investments. It is understandable that the Government would be concerned about the resulting write-downs. But moving to a policy of trying to control asset prices is a very big call; and it seems foolish to get into that game by targeting the prices of one and only one class of asset, and a relatively minor one at that, for the purpose of protecting funds that are so poorly managed that they have failed to properly disclose the deteriorating quality of their balance sheet. All this is not to deny that credit restrictions will result in some development projects for commercial property being cancelled or deferred. But the projects at risk are those that are most marginal and whose value to the economy has in fact diminished as growth has slowed. It makes no sense for the Government to prevent those cancellations and deferrals from occurring, all the more so as our economy, whatever its defects, is hardly short of office blocks. This is especially the case as commercial property values are notoriously cyclical. Developers know this, and most developers hedge their position by securing anchor tenants (such as large supermarket chains in the case of shopping centres) to underpin their revenue base and their ability to secure finance. By intervening to prop up the market, the Government sends all the wrong signals, both in the short run and in the longer term. In the short run, the scheme seems likely to induce developers to play off their existing foreign lenders against the safety net the scheme provides. This could accelerate the very withdrawal of foreign lenders the scheme is intended to guard against, while allowing developers to secure some free kicks on the basis of what amounts to taxpayer-funded insurance. As for the longer run, the risk is that of protecting precisely those developers who did not take adequate precautions, while signalling to others the likelihood of government bailouts. The result will be to make property markets more, rather than less, cyclical. What about the impact on jobs? This seems a furphy. To begin with, changes in the value of existing assets in no way directly alter employment prospects. Indeed, were rents to fall, business costs would be reduced and that might improve conditions across a wide range of sectors. True, the development projects that would otherwise not occur may create some jobs. But why would those jobs be any more valuable than the jobs that could be created by using the $2 billion for other purposes, including cutting economically distorting taxes? .........

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24966998-5015664,00.html

That one makes a bit more sense sprint. He sounds like he's actually interested in the economics rather than partisan point scoring.

The truth starts to eke out.
Leftard aussies ALREADY shy away from confessing they voted for ruddydudd.


Quote:

NOTHING beats a relaxing summer holiday with a couple of good novels: a time to wander lazily in the world of imagination and fantasy. But while the rest of the nation chilled out over the festive season with a light and breezy summer read, the midnight oil was burning at Kirribilli House. There, a lonely figure sat hunched over his laptop constructing a political fantasy of his own. The Prime Minister was having great fun. Imagining himself once more in a heroic pose. Last year he was Churchill defending us all from "the economic equivalent of a rolling national security crisis". But during the summer, in his essay on the "the ideological causes of the financial crisis", he has cast himself as a great socialist hero, carrying the banner of social democracy and striking out against the wickedness of neo-liberalism, 30 years of which, he assures, is the root cause of the global financial crisis. Neo-liberalism's central thrust, he writes, is "that government activity should be constrained, and ultimately replaced, by market forces". He says these "unchecked market forces have brought capitalism to the precipice". Only the intervention of social democracy -- a euphemism for socialism -- can "save capitalism from itself" and protect us from the perils of "the extreme Left and the nationalist Right". Phew! While the rest of us were relaxing during the summer, perhaps reading some fiction, our Prime Minister was tapping away, imagining himself battling off communists to the Left, fascists to the Right, clad only in a suit of shining ideological purity. All of us remember Kevin07, shiny faced and earnest, proclaiming himself an economic conservative. In one television advertisement after another his message to Australians was clear: there wasn't a cigarette paper's difference between him and John Howard on economic policy. Free markets? He loved them. Surpluses? The bigger, the better. Tax? Well, of course it should be lower. Well, all of that is cast away now. Instead, he preaches social democracy. It is important to remember that social democrat was a term created by avowedly socialist political parties in Europe who wanted to emphasise that they were (unlike their communist comrades) committed to achieving a socialist society through democratic means as opposed to violent revolution. So in little more than a year, the economic conservative has become a socialist. The essay in The Monthly is such a poor piece of work and has been so widely ridiculed and debunked, it is difficult to believe he imagined it would be regarded as a serious contribution to the debate about the global financial crisis. It is above all a political document designed to ensure that Australians accord no responsibility to Rudd for our present economic problems. Everything is the fault of the global financial crisis. Nothing is to be blamed on St Kevin. We saw a good example of this strategy this week. The gross domestic product numbers for the December quarter showed growth was negative. It was perfectly plain that the $10 billion December cash splash had been almost entirely saved: household savings were higher than they had been for many years. So the cash splash had failed as an economic stimulus. What was Rudd's response? "We cannot swim against the tide." As usual he is deliberately confusing impotence with incompetence. Just because our Government is bungling its economic response does not mean it is powerless. Rudd has chosen to borrow tens of billions of dollars to spend in ways that simply will not deliver an effective boost to the economy: too little bang for too much buck. These borrowings will undoubtedly result in higher taxes and higher interest rates in years ahead. .....

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25148674-7583,00.html

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 7^th, 2009 at 9:56pm:

The truth starts to eke out. Leftard aussies ALREADY shy away from confessing they voted for ruddydudd. Quote: NOTHING beats a relaxing summer holiday with a couple of good novels: a time to wander lazily in the world of imagination and fantasy. But while the rest of the nation chilled out over the festive season with a light and breezy summer read, the midnight oil was burning at Kirribilli House. There, a lonely figure sat hunched over his laptop constructing a political fantasy of his own. The Prime Minister was having great fun. Imagining himself once more in a heroic pose. Last year he was Churchill defending us all from "the economic equivalent of a rolling national security crisis". But during the summer, in his essay on the "the ideological causes of the financial crisis", he has cast himself as a great socialist hero, carrying the banner of social democracy and striking out against the wickedness of neo-liberalism, 30 years of which, he assures, is the root cause of the global financial crisis. Neo-liberalism's central thrust, he writes, is "that government activity should be constrained, and ultimately replaced, by market forces". He says these "unchecked market forces have brought capitalism to the precipice". Only the intervention of social democracy -- a euphemism for socialism -- can "save capitalism from itself" and protect us from the perils of "the extreme Left and the nationalist Right". Phew! While the rest of us were relaxing during the summer, perhaps reading some fiction, our Prime Minister was tapping away, imagining himself battling off communists to the Left, fascists to the Right, clad only in a suit of shining ideological purity. All of us remember Kevin07, shiny faced and earnest, proclaiming himself an economic conservative. In one television advertisement after another his message to Australians was clear: there wasn't a cigarette paper's difference between him and John Howard on economic policy. Free markets? He loved them. Surpluses? The bigger, the better. Tax? Well, of course it should be lower. Well, all of that is cast away now. Instead, he preaches social democracy. It is important to remember that social democrat was a term created by avowedly socialist political parties in Europe who wanted to emphasise that they were (unlike their communist comrades) committed to achieving a socialist society through democratic means as opposed to violent revolution. So in little more than a year, the economic conservative has become a socialist. The essay in The Monthly is such a poor piece of work and has been so widely ridiculed and debunked, it is difficult to believe he imagined it would be regarded as a serious contribution to the debate about the global financial crisis. It is above all a political document designed to ensure that Australians accord no responsibility to Rudd for our present economic problems. Everything is the fault of the global financial crisis. Nothing is to be blamed on St Kevin. We saw a good example of this strategy this week. The gross domestic product numbers for the December quarter showed growth was negative. It was perfectly plain that the $10 billion December cash splash had been almost entirely saved: household savings were higher than they had been for many years. So the cash splash had failed as an economic stimulus. What was Rudd's response? "We cannot swim against the tide." As usual he is deliberately confusing impotence with incompetence. Just because our Government is bungling its economic response does not mean it is powerless. Rudd has chosen to borrow tens of billions of dollars to spend in ways that simply will not deliver an effective boost to the economy: too little bang for too much buck. These borrowings will undoubtedly result in higher taxes and higher interest rates in years ahead. ..... http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25148674-7583,00.html

Two things sprint-
Who are these lefty Aussies shying away from Rudd? he has a 66% aproval up against Turnbull on 19-20% ay best, which brings me to my next point.
Turnbull wrote the bloody story,
What would you expect him to write? he is just gripping onto power of his own party and I doubt he'll see out the year as leader.

skippy - people I know are quite disenchanted with ruddy.
Did you notice his wife gave herself a $1 million bonus ?


turnbull writes well. logical correct discussion

Quote:

skippy - people I know are quite disenchanted with ruddy. Did you notice his wife gave herself a $1 million bonus ?

This is very disappointing especially as Rudd has been spruiking that extreme capitalism has to end.

Rudd's stimulus package is not working.  He is ensuring that our country has huge future deficits which our children will have to pay back.

An interesting extract by the economic historian Professor Niall Ferguson of Harvard & Oxford:-

The reality being repressed is that the western world is suffering a crisis of excessive indebtedness. Many governments are too highly leveraged, as are many corporations. More importantly, households are groaning under unprecedented debt burdens. Worst of all are the banks. The best evidence that we are in denial about this is the widespread belief that the crisis can be overcome by creating yet more debt.

There is a better way to go but it is in the opposite direction. The aim must be not to increase debt but to reduce it.

http://www.niallferguson.com/site/FERG/Templates/ArticleItem.aspx?pageid=204

Professor Niall goes on to offer solutions - but this is exactly what Rudd is doing - increasing our debt load.  He is no better than Howard and could end up being far worse.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 8^th, 2009 at 1:08pm:

skippy - people I know are quite disenchanted with ruddy. Did you notice his wife gave herself a $1 million bonus ? turnbull writes well. logical correct discussion

So the people you know are in the minority, how many of them voted for Rudd anyway? me thinks a PM with 66% aproval will be a PM for a long time.
As for his wife, you mean she paid herself 1.4 million fron her OWN company? a company that isn't going broke, isn't packing up and moving overseas, and is owned by her, gee I hope you dont work for yourself sprint, what would you do, give all your profits to charity?
Anybody trying to tie this in with Pacific brands is way off the mark, but desperate politicians do desperate things, how longs Mal got left as leader ?

mantra wrote on Mar 9^th, 2009 at 6:59am:

Quote: skippy - people I know are quite disenchanted with ruddy. Did you notice his wife gave herself a $1 million bonus ? This is very disappointing especially as Rudd has been spruiking that extreme capitalism has to end. Rudd's stimulus package is not working.  He is ensuring that our country has huge future deficits which our children will have to pay back. An interesting extract by the economic historian Professor Niall Ferguson of Harvard & Oxford:- The reality being repressed is that the western world is suffering a crisis of excessive indebtedness. Many governments are too highly leveraged, as are many corporations. More importantly, households are groaning under unprecedented debt burdens. Worst of all are the banks. The best evidence that we are in denial about this is the widespread belief that the crisis can be overcome by creating yet more debt. There is a better way to go but it is in the opposite direction. The aim must be not to increase debt but to reduce it. http://www.niallferguson.com/site/FERG/Templates/ArticleItem.aspx?pageid=204 Professor Niall goes on to offer solutions - but this is exactly what Rudd is doing - increasing our debt load.  He is no better than Howard and could end up being far worse.

Mantra, on average there is zero debt. One person's debt is another person's credit.

freediver wrote on Mar 9^th, 2009 at 9:56am:

Mantra, on average there is zero debt. One person's debt is another person's credit.

It depends who it's owed to.  Currently personal debt in Australia is around $750 billion and our foreign trade debt is $600 plus billion.  A good proportion of that $750 billion might be owed to banks, but where did the banks borrow the money from - mainly overseas where interest rates have always been consistently lower enabling larger profits for Australian banks.

Superannuation is in a serious mess too - not only has much of it been lost from the sub-prime crisis, but we find out today that there's another $56 billion that has been mislaid between the employer, post office and the tax office.  The right whingers used to spruik that no matter how much debt we were in - our superannuation would cover it.

That myth has flown out the window.

Quote:

THERESE Rein must be sick of being used and abused in every conceivable way by the ALP and its allies. She was forced to sell the Australian arm of her business because its use of common law contracts conflicted with the ALP’s union agenda to outlaw flexible agreements. And now she is being held up as a human shield to deflect completely legitimate criticism of her husband’s hypocritical attack on “neo-liberal, let ‘er rip capitalism”. The same party heavies who were responsible for Rein selling her business to appease union warlords opposed to flexible, non-award contracts have now dragged her into an unrelated debate about her husband’s now notorious essay in The Monthly. Malcolm Turnbull must have hit a soft spot to provoke the feeble “don’t attack Kevin’s wife” defence from the very people who forced her to sacrifice her Australian business on the altar of that sacred union award agenda. In May 2007 I wrote that a woman who “ought to be the hero of working Australians” had been brought undone, not by a conflict of interest (the government conflicts could have been managed) but by a conflict of policy. Her successful business, which employed workers on common law contracts, became a potent and successful symbol of the flexibility that the ALP rejected. Once again Rein is being used as a political football by her husband’s mates, blokes such as Stephen Smith and Craig Emerson. Instead of tackling Turnbull’s arguments, the Prime Minister’s bouncer boys resorted to holding up Rein, using her like a head of garlic to ward off the vampires. The Foreign Minister said Turnbull had crossed a line in Australian politics by dragging in the PM’s wife. Emerson described Turnbull’s criticism as a “low act” that pointed to a “bad mark against the character of Malcolm Turnbull”. In fact, Smith and Emerson were the low acts who scored bad marks. They exposed the extent of their political expediency: using Rein how and when it suits them. If they genuinely believed that spouses should be kept out of the rough and tumble of politics, they would not have used her as a shield to deflect and embarrass Turnbull. In a sense, they were forced to resort to using Rein because they had no other comeback to Turnbull’s criticism of Rudd. That’s why the Opposition Leader was neither deflected nor embarrassed. There were many grounds on which Turnbull was entitled to (and did) point out in his essay in The Weekend Australian on Saturday that Rudd’s attack on neo-liberalism was deeply hypocritical, not to mention dishonest. He repeated many of the inconsistencies previously made about Rudd’s self-righteous attack on free markets. And then Turnbull made the standout argument. He said that someone who has personally derived extraordinary material benefits from the Howard government’s policies of government outsourcing was in no position to criticise the morality of those policies, unless he was prepared to forgo the benefits. Rudd cannot both live in the lap of luxury generated by Howard’s policies and simultaneously excoriate those same policies as delivering ill-gotten gains to the greedy, well-to-do neo-liberals. Let’s repeat—for the sake of clarity—that Rein is a fine role model and that she and her family should enjoy the fruits of her hard labours in business. Just as my family and I enjoy the fruits of my husband’s work as a successful businessman. Rudd is also entitled to enjoy the benefits of the family share portfolio and properties in various locations. But the moment he wants to attack policies that directly propped up his own lifestyle, he (not his wife or children) should give up those benefits. Remember, too, this is a chap who has no compunction about dishing out the personal abuse. He calls Turnbull the “member for Goldman Sachs” in an effort to paint his political opponent as a greedy rich guy. Yet, at Turnbull’s first suggestion that, as a man in a glass house, Rudd should not be throwing boulders about, he sends in a couple of really courageous attack dogs who hold up a picture of St Therese to protect him. The man who sold himself as a safe pair of economic hands prior to the 2007 election has now unmasked himself as just another old-fashioned class warrior - when it suits. The Prime Minister’s performance on Channel Seven’s Sunday Night program was the ultimate exercise in spin where he felt the pain of “you good people”—the Pacific Brands workers—and unloaded yet again on the “unrestrained greed” of corporate executives. He even uttered a swear word for effect. Presumably, he thinks this is how you enamour yourself to workers. But it’s all an illusion. Rudd has more personas than Sybil, the girl with 13 different personalities portrayed by Sally Field in a 1976 film. At business functions, Rudd is the epitome of rationality about the role of business. Among workers, he says the relocation by Pacific Brands “absolutely stinks”. Rudd worked as a senior China consultant with KPMG from 1996 until 1998. Does he honestly expect us to believe that he would have told his KPMG clients not to run more cost effective manufacturing operations in China? Does he now tell the Chinese Government that he doesn’t want Australian firms to run manufacturing operations in China?

tbc

Quote:

Rudd and his comrades in government are the very worst form of class warriors. They feel the pain of the underclass when it suits and then enjoy the fruits of the overclass. As Strewth reported on Monday, there was a fear of awkwardness when Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Industry Minister Kim Carr boarded a plane last week with Pacific Brand’s CEO, Sue Morphet. Alas, the only awkwardness emerged when the workers’ pals in the Labor Government slid into their business-class seats for the arduous flight from Melbourne to Sydney while Morphet travelled in economy. Indeed, pass through that deliberately nondescript frosted glass door to Qantas’ exclusive Chairman’s Lounge any day of the week, where Labor MP’s waft around enjoying free food and drink far from the workers outside. It’s not free of course. Rudd’s friends, the workers, are paying for it. Spare us, Prime Minister. The real lesson is this. If you are going to write the kind of dishonest and hypocritical claptrap as you did in The Monthly, you can expect to have people pointing out the intellectual and moral weaknesses in your arguments. And you have to understand this battle of ideas can get a bit willing. If you’re going to dish it out, you need to stand your ground when someone belts you back in an obvious weak spot. Glass jaws have no place in politics. And with due respect, PM, if you are going to start a fight like this, don’t hide behind your wife’s skirt when battle is joined.

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/janetalbrechtsen/index.php/theaustralian/comments/rudd_hiding_behind_st_therese/


Onya Janet

Quote:

There are two tests of political conviction. The first is one of consistency, delivering on promises made and adherence to core beliefs over time. The second test of conviction is courage: whether a politician has held beliefs before they emerged as the orthodoxy or simply jumped on a bandwagon only when it was popular and safe to do so. So who is the real Rudd? You be the judge. Rudd was the Labor politician opposed to a broad-based consumption tax who rose in parliament on June 30, 1999, speaking with apparent passion to declare the passing of the GST legislation “a day of fundamental injustice. It will be recorded as the day when the social compact that has governed this nation for the last 100 years was torn up.” In 2006, he wrote about John Howard’s “regressive consumption tax”. Rudd’s heartfelt belief opposing the GST has not been aired since he became Prime Minister. GST keeps all the states afloat. Rudd was the Opposition leader who described global warming during the last federal election as “the great moral issue of our time”. It was a vote winner. Kyoto was signed with the conviction that climate change was “the defining challenge of our generation”. And then the Rudd shuffle. By last December, the great moral issue was reduced to a meaningless carbon emissions reduction target of 5 per cent by 2020. Rudd ignored the findings of the UN panel he once lauded, which laid down a minimum target of 25 per cent to 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 as necessary to prevent the sort of catastrophic climate change that Rudd once believed in. In October 2006, Rudd wrote his “light on the hill” Labor agenda for Australia was “taking the lead on climate change.” Now, there is no mention of leadership at Copenhagen 2009. As Opposition leader in October 2007, Rudd committed a Labor government to taking “legal proceedings against President [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad on a charge of inciting genocide” when the Iranian President spoke about wiping Israel off the map. The tough language of conviction was followed by inaction. Last December the Rudd Government announced it would not pursue legal action. There was more tough-guy talk about Japan’s annual whaling hunt during the final term of the Howard government. As Opposition leader, Rudd spoke in grave tones about taking Japan to the International Court of Justice or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. That promise has evaporated into the political ether of office. In addition to dumping promises, Rudd has a knack for discovering beliefs only when they are politically popular. Rudd boarded the responsibility agenda of indigenous politics only after it was politically safe to be on that side of the ideological divide, buffered by black leaders such as Noel Pearson and Warren Mundine. By contrast, John Howard staked out his ground on the dangers of victimhood politics and the need for practical reconciliation long ago, attracting scorn and derision for not kowtowing to the then accepted orthodoxy of symbolism and treaties. Similarly, as Labor leader, Rudd morphed into an economic conservative when it was electorally popular to carve out those credentials. His language of fiscal prudence wooed voters as he assured us not a “sliver of light” separated Labor and the Coalition on fiscal policy. Now, amid a global financial crisis, when it is fashionable to attack the free market, Rudd’s stripes have changed. Now he is a social democrat who writes tomes about a conspiracy in Australia of neo-liberals who have left the country financially wrecked. As his more astute critics have asked, which social democratic country would Rudd rather govern in place of neo-liberal Australia, where a handy surplus enabled him to turn into a big-spending Keynesian PM? While he still claims to be an economic conservative, saying so does not make it so. Billions on cash handouts and “social” spending look like Rudd’s down payments on the next election dressed in the slippery language of “stimulus”. Rudd’s hyperbole serves only to make his undelivered promises and inconsistencies even more pronounced. Strip away the big words and solemn phrases and an empty edifice of unfulfilled promises and shifting opportunism remains. Rudd reminds one of the way 1920s US Democratic Party leader William Gibbs McAdoo described president Warren Harding’s speeches: “an army of pompous phrases moving across the landscape in search of an idea”. Confidence in a leader comes from knowing who they are and what they believe. Love him or loathe him, Howard was known to friend and foe. His political beliefs remained steady and he pursued them often against the orthodoxy of the time. Pragmatism was, of course, part of Howard’s political make-up. For example, he rejected a GST only to later embrace it as part of much needed tax reform, despite the political risks. But Rudd is an entirely different leader. There is not a single instance of Rudd taking a responsible but unpopular decision. With philosophical principles impossible to pin down, his only consistent and coherent belief is in political power. Every Rudd position has been determined by how to get it and, now, how to keep it.

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/janetalbrechtsen/index.php/theaustralian/comments/who_is_the_real_rudd

Article abridged for space reasons

Here's labors logic.
Borrowing money to give it away to losers.
We are ALL in the gun to repay it - hello banana republic !!!!!!!!!!!!




Quote:

AUSTRALIANS will pay for the Government's excessive spending through their taxes, former Liberal treasurer Peter Costello says. Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner has said Australia's debt levels are sustainable, likening them to someone earning $100,000 a year taking out a $5000 personal loan. But he admits to lying awake at night worrying about Australia's slide into debt, and yesterday he refused to speculate on what the ceiling on borrowings should be. Mr Costello said maybe Mr Tanner should have more sleepless nights. "He's apparently not worrying about it so much as to not borrow it," he said on Macquarie Radio today. The previous Coalition government had spent 10 years paying off $100 billion in debt - and the current Labor Government had re-borrowed the same amount in a year, he said. "When the economy starts growing again, then we are still going to have all of these debts," Mr Costello said. The Government would have to tax Australians to service the debt. "It will be taxing people to pay the interest bills, eventually taxing people to pay off the debt," he said. "People are going to be paying for this. "They've got to understand that the cheques that are going out now are borrowed money. The Government is borrowing money to send cheques to people and asking them to spend it. "That's nice if you're getting a cheque. No one's going to turn back a cheque are they? But remember this: it's borrowed money."

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25175079-5003402,00.html

If we were on such a downward path of stupidity..Keating would have put his hand up by now.

Thats the way he is. He cant help himself. Until then I wont worry.

Quote:

Keating's stimulus doubts March 6, 2009 THE Opposition has gained a surprising new ally in its fight against Kevin Rudd's stimulus package — Paul Keating. The former Labor prime minister cast doubt on the effectiveness of such packages, saying they had so far failed to lift confidence or boost the economy. In comments that will be seized on by the Opposition, Mr Keating has cast doubt over the effectiveness of pump priming in an opinion piece published in London's The Financial Times. "The recent series of government packages, notwithstanding their scale and speed, has had little demonstrable effect on the level of confidence or the outlook for ongoing activity," Mr Keating writes. The Opposition has sharpened its attack on the Government's $42 billion economic stimulus package in the wake of this week's national accounts figures, which showed the economy sliding towards recession. Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull again decried the "cash splash" yesterday, saying the stimulus package was poorly targeted and had failed to achieve its objectives. Mr Keating's comment piece does not refer specifically to Australia, and it calls on the G20 countries to "construct a new paradigm to resuscitate the world financial and economic system". A spokesman for Mr Rudd said last night the negative remarks about economic stimulus packages were "a matter for Mr Keating".

Now Im a bit worried.

oceanz wrote on Mar 12^th, 2009 at 9:17am:

If we were on such a downward path of stupidity..Keating would have put his hand up by now. Thats the way he is. He cant help himself. Until then I wont worry.

Well you never were that smart anyhow.

Please don't make it personal AN.

Yet another rudd dream has bitten the dust.


Quote:

WHACK. The Rudd Government just got sideswiped - again - by the global financial crisis. This time, the target was its big economic infrastructure plans. The problem now is there is little private sector money being invested in such projects. That means the $45 billion worth of priority projects about to be identified by Infrastructure Australia will have be drastically curtailed or delayed. Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese says that's not a problem because it was never envisaged that these projects would be delivered within the space of one or two years. True enough. But Kevin Rudd's rhetoric has not been so nuanced as he has repeatedly talked up the Government's willingness to invest in Australia's productive capacity through infrastructure spending. That is supposed to start in the May budget. Unfortunately, even the $8billion remaining in the Building Australia Fund won't go far without private sector financing to back it up. This is not a problem unique to Australia, as governments all around the world struggle with what to do. At the same time, the states are having increasing and particular difficulty borrowing to fund their existing infrastructure programs. That is largely because of another commonwealth government initiative: the guarantee of retail banks' wholesale bank funding. This guarantee has allowed Australia's banks to continue borrowing billions of dollars overseas, which has been of vital importance to the economy. The trouble is that the AAA rating bank debt now looks far more attractive than state government bonds, which are not similarly guaranteed by the commonwealth. That means the commonwealth will enventually have to extend the guarantee to the states or, far more likely, just end up doing the borrowing itself on behalf of the states. Most economists believe the Government can still afford to do this, and it will end up creating a much more efficient and centralised process, albeit one that would greatly limit states' independence. But that level of commonwealth commitment also makes it harder for the Government to borrow more for its own infrastructure spending, particularly when it is also financing its ever-expanding budget deficits. The $900 presents going out to households will add $12 billion to that without much long-term "national building" return. Even various tax breaks to encourage private sector investment would be expensive for a badly stretched budget with no real evidence it would work as planned. Certainly not in the current climate. One alternative would be for the commonwealth to guarantee some of the infrastructure borrowing for its priority projects - an idea being pushed by the investment banks. This won't be immediately appealing in Canberra, given the distortion obviously created by the various guarantees and the fact that the private sector would then push all the risk on to the federal Government. It might prefer just to issue billions more in infrastructure bonds itself. Debt? Who's counting?

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25208445-5014087,00.html

And guess who has to pay for his ego ??


[quote]LABOR will use its numbers in the lower house today to reject a Senate-amended version of its Fair Work bill, setting up a parliamentary showdown.

It could be the first step on the path to a double-dissolution election.

Treasurer Wayne Swan said Labor was “absolutely determined” to push through parliament its planned changes to IR laws.

He confirmed the Government would use its numbers in the lower house today to reject an amended Fair Work Bill, passed by the Senate hours in the small hours of this morning.

The bill will then be sent back to the upper house. /[quote]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25214526-601,00.html

The senate has no obligation to support government plans.  If the government wants to risk another election and try to gain more power, so be it.

The ALP will not be getting any support from me while they keep trying to implement stupid crap like trying to tax a problem out of existence or tell me what I should or should not look at on the internet (I am not talking illegal stuff).

Quote:

The PM's public and private personas are two very different beasts. THERE'S a yarn doing the rounds in a state bureaucracy about a recent meeting between Kevin Rudd's chief of staff, Alister Jordan, and a group of senior public servants. The meeting was plodding along fine, so the story goes, until Rudd himself stormed in and proceeded to loudly berate Jordan before striding out, stunned silence ringing in his wake. Jordan is probably one of the hardest working blokes on the planet, so to be yelled at in front of a bunch of bureaucrats by your boss who also happens to be the Prime Minister would be difficult to cop. The feeling was that Rudd had stretched the rules of normal polite behaviour by interrupting the meeting, failing to acknowledge others in the room and openly humiliating Jordan, the most senior staffer in the Government. These tales do tend to be magnified in the telling, but it does illustrate something that people are increasingly coming to suspect about our Prime Minister: Rudd's public and private personas are two entirely different beasts. The public Rudd — Kevin, as he likes to be known — is nerdy but nice, a policy wonk with sound Labor values and a strong sense of social justice. He's consultative, fresh, calm and bristling with ideas and energy. Much of this is actually true. It barely needs to be said that Rudd is very smart and hard-working with fundamentally decent values at his core. But beneath the surface also lurks a more complex chap. "Nice" simply isn't a word that associates would use in private to describe Rudd: unrelenting, demanding, driven, potty-mouthed perhaps, but not nice. Former opposition leaders Kim Beazley and Brendan Nelson were widely regarded as "nice". If anything, it was seen as a hindrance. As former treasurer Peter Costello pointed out in his regular column in The Age last week, reports of bad behaviour by Rudd, including his notorious mid-air tanty, seem to have done him no harm. On the contrary, his personal approval rating remains in the stratosphere............

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/a-rudd-awakening-20090418-aavb.html

Noice - the ALP stick it up farmers.

Thankfully farmers know when they are being buggered and have a long memory.


Quote:

A MEETING of angry landowners tonight at the Memorial Hall in the country town of Yass outside Canberra will throw the spotlight on another crisis for the beleaguered NSW Labor Government. As with the countless other government initiatives that have antagonised the state's population, this latest crisis is of the Government's making. It involves a now familiar theme: a centralising of bureaucratic control in the name of streamlining costs that has in reality led to higher charges. It follows the decision to create a body called the Livestock Health and Pest Authority to replace the Rural Lands Protection Board, which was set up years ago to help farmers tackle the rabbit plague and has grown like topsy ever since. It was argued that the new system, which reduced the number of authorities from 47 to 14, would mean administrative savings of more than $8 million a year, which would be reflected in rate reductions. But within a few months of the new structure being set up on January 1, farmers say they were being told that this was unlikely to eventuate. In fact, in many cases their rates have risen sharply. The problem has been exacerbated by the Government's decision to exempt landowners with properties of less than 10ha from paying LHPA rates. This has cut the state's rateable blocks of land by 5per cent, with the lost revenue being billed to those holding bigger properties. Having battled drought, bushfires and all forms of pestilence, these landowners are not taking to the new system very well. Tonight's Yass meeting comes as a groundswell builds up across the state to withhold payment of these rates. NSW parliamentary Speaker Richard Torbay, an independent who holds the seat of Northern Tablelands, says some farmers in the region have been reporting rate increases of between 43 and 120 per cent under the new system. The Government's claim that the increased cost comes from an insect levy to control locusts has done nothing to quell the mounting discontent across rural NSW, with affected landholders branding it a desperate money-grabbing move by a cash-strapped administration. There is no better illustration of the Government's failure to anticipate the social and political impact of bureaucratic engineering than its mismanagement of the public hospital system. This has been driven to the brink of collapse because of Labor's obsession with super-bureaucratised authorities to administer the regional health system, which report directly to Macquarie Street, with little involvement of hospital staff. This has reached such a calamitous stage that three of NSW's area hospital services are believed to be close to being placed in the hands of administrators. Meanwhile, the electorate has been told it will have to pay higher electricity charges to underwrite an upgrade of the state's power system, which been allowed to run down to a critical level through a lack of adequate repairs and maintenance. The rural rates backlash adds to the leadership pressures building up inside the ALP over the performance of Premier Nathan Rees, with his Government now in the second half of its term; the next election is due in March 2011. As a result, Liberal power brokers are becoming increasingly convinced that there will be another leadership change in the Labor Party - the third since it won office under Bob Carr in 1995 - with Deputy Premier Carmel Tebbutt replacing Rees. One conservative theory is that in a shake-out following Tebbutt's election, former planning minister Frank Sartor will take over the health portfolio, with Health Minister John Della Bosca replacing Eric Roozendaal as treasurer. Whatever the case, a pre-election change in Labor's front row would put Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell, who is struggling to gain policy traction despite the Government's pitiful performance, under considerable internal pressure. The challenge for O'Farrell is not to convince the electorate that the state has a bad government - it is well aware of that - but to demonstrate to the public and his party's number crunchers what he and the conservative Opposition stand for.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25361302-7583,00.html

This is how ALP looks after their voters.
Or is it how the ALP make houses more affordable - if you still have a job that is.



Quote:

MORE Victorians are losing their homes as unemployment rises, with court figures revealing a 30 per cent rise in claims lodged in the first three months of 2009 compared with the same period last year. As the Federal Government expands its mortgage hardship relief scheme, Supreme Court figures have shown at least 880 households have so far faced foreclosures this year, compared with 677 by the end of March last year. The figures also show the court had 298 writs lodged for repossessions in the month of March alone, up 46 per cent compared with the month of March last year. The figures come as the Federal Government announced new provisions to help those struggling with a mortgage. Until now, a person experiencing financial hardship could seek relief from their financial institution for debts up to $312,000. Under the consumer credit law overhaul, that limit will be increased to $500,000. The changes will also include responsible lending provisions designed to force institutions to make sure borrowers can repay. According to Reserve Bank figures, non-performing loans or arrears rates have climbed to 0.5 per cent, up from 0.3 per cent at the end of 2007. RBA figures also show that banks' bad debts known as "impaired assets" rose from 0.19 per cent of all assets at the end of 2007 to 0.74 per cent at the end of last year, the highest amount in about a decade. Nicole Rich, policy director for the Consumer Action Law Centre, said that although the hardship variations would offer temporary relief for people who lost their jobs and were struggling with their mortgage repayments, many consumers would still be left vulnerable to loans they could not afford. She said the increase in repossession actions was concerning. They showed that from April 2008 until the end of March this year, more than 3000 repossession writs had been lodged in the Supreme Court. "What really concerns me about the figures is that they are really going up a lot and we haven't even seen the worst of it in terms of unemployment," Ms Rich said. She said demand for financial advice had risen as people struggled with debt. Melbourne University professor Ian Ramsay, who wrote a recent study showing that bankruptcy was becoming more widespread and claiming wealthier people, said that more homes would be lost as more Australians became unemployed.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/more-lose-homes-as-job-losses-bite-20090427-akoi.html

What srudd going to do about all these voters ?
it never happened under Howard.


Quote:

A GROWING number of NSW residents are on the cusp of losing their homes to banks and other lenders despite the steep fall in interest rates. The number of repossession orders in the state dropped at the end of last year, as lower interest rates offered relief to borrowers struggling to repay loans, according to figures made public by the NSW Attorney-General's Department yesterday. But that trend reversed in January, and consumer credit advocates blame an increase in joblessness. Repossession writs are issued once a lender seeks an order from the Supreme Court to take possession of a property. If successful, the Sheriff's office sets a date for the borrower to leave. If the borrower fails to leave, the Sheriff turns up at the house, signs the property over to the lender, and changes the locks. The Supreme Court has issued an average of more than 300 writs a month since January. The figure is equivalent to the rate of repossession at the start of last year, when interest rates were still going up, and is a steep increase from the 162 writs issued in December. Karen Cox, the co-ordinator at the Consumer Credit Legal Centre, said she had not seen a lull in the number of households seeking help. Borrowers approaching her office had often lost their job, or were stuck with high, fixed-rate mortgages. Raj Venga, the chief executive officer of the Credit Ombudsman Service, which deals with non-bank lenders, said more than 20 per cent of complaints he dealt with were on hardship grounds. "That is huge," Mr Venga said. Hardship complaints usually made up only about 5 per cent of all credit issued. "On the one hand interest rates are going down, but on the other hand people are facing other issues around employment," Mr Venga said. The Reserve Bank last month said arrears rates on mortgages continued to climb, but were at relatively low levels overall. About 20,000 mortgage-holders were more than 90 days behind on their loan at the end of December, compared with 13,000 the year before. Ads by Google

http://business.smh.com.au/business/thousands-living-on-borrowed-time-20090428-am0w.html

That's because Howard didn't have to deal with the worst financial crisis in living memory.
Do you think Australia is some how immune to what happens in the world sprint? you must or else you wouldn't post such nonsense.
Australia is part of the world economy. no matter who was PM we would be affected, do you understand that? I suspect I'm wasting my time.
Of course we wouldn't be in such a bad position had Howard not squandered so much money from the mining boom, its a real pity he and Costello never had the for sight to spend money on infrastructure when they had so much coming in, instead they squandered it on pork barrelling.

Those who voted for Rudd found that their biggest worry under the Coalition - the utter waste of cash and the neglect of our infrastructure.  We could be leading the world - but instead we're way down the list, not much further ahead of developing countries.

the buck stops with the boss.

rudds in charge, howard and the libs dealt with it very well, they are in opposition !!!!!!!!

Look at how rudd is goin to change the world by signing kyoto, a computer for every school kids, broadband to every house, ........
on and on and on.

he has failed at almost every false promise, avoids the media's questions , now those who voted for him are being thrown out of their homes.
And the ALPers say "its not ruddys fault."
You all read from his script also ??

I'm not happy with Rudd. I believe he's getting us into too much government debt which our kids will have to pay for.  He's making a lot of mistakes but people think he's wonderul because of the handouts.

They are not gifts - they are loans.

Howard was past his use by date and Rudd was the only alternative.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 29^th, 2009 at 10:27am:

the buck stops with the boss. rudds in charge, howard and the libs dealt with it very well, they are in opposition !!!!!!!! Look at how rudd is going to change the world by signing kyoto, a computer for every school kids, broadband to every house, ........ on and on and on. he has failed at almost every false promise, avoids the media's questions , now those who voted for him are being thrown out of their homes. And the ALPers say "its not ruddys fault." You all read from his script also ??

Just more bulls hit hey sprint? ,try to deal with facts its much easier to follow.
Rudds in charge, yes he is, do you blame Rudd for the world recession?


so Costello says he agrees with signing Kyoto as well, looks like the parties left you behind there sprint.
The broadband plan is called infrastructure .something I know you Liebrils aren't familiar with, its called nation building Labor governments have been doing it in Australia for years, You've probably only lived in our country a short time so don't understand.
As for the rest of your little spit, Rudd's more popular now than when he kicked the rodents butt eighteen months ago, that means he's gaining new supporters and the Libs are losing even more.
Your old fashion fascist ways might be popular in NZ but not here ,if you want a rightard fascist bar stars for a PM,why not move back home, the conservatives need all the support they can get, most people who think with their heads have moved on and dumped the fascists, but they'll always be some dissenters who never learn to use their brain.

Yes Skippy ,Im wondering how Howard would have done it any better.. to be honest..seriously how would the opposition for all their usual/ and expected bagging of how Ruud and Swan are handling this , have done it any differently?..Rudd says its quite doeable to pay the debt off when the   recession lifts and they are talking about a 2 year time frame, when the economy is ticking over again..I have faith in that.

They are acting preventively and that sounds very sensible..they are saying if not for the stimulus measures put in place so far the downturn would be far worse.

As for the handouts, they should be selective who they are directed to, for it is clear those who dont need the money are squirrelling it away and not using it as intended..it is only the poor who are actually have to spend it.

So many struggling families getting some relief..I cant see how it is a bad thing and they are actually using the money as it was intended..whereby those who stash the money away are in a sense derailing the whole process.

Spend money to make money. It will pay off and Rudd and Swan cant be that blind as to not think beyond the recession..

skippy - no I don't blame rudd for the recession.
I blame the leftards that bought what they could not afford.

costello said that to negate some of rudds big-noting populist whims.
it's a bad policy for aussie with no benefit for the world.
As howard said, he won't do it as it won't help aussie.
It has not helped any country who has signed it.

yes, I know what infrastructure is.
putting in cable across aussie to enable people to see clips faster is not infrastructure.
it will be obselete before it is up.
it's a populist whim at our expense.

rudd runs the media well, very few articles against him. the polls are very selective.

NZ is even more leftard than aussie.
thats quite a gong really -  "old fashioned rightard fascist "
Greatly appreciated, never knew you cared so much. :-)

Ok if I use it as a singature ?

They should be selective about the handouts because they have been given out to anyone and everyone even those people who don't live in Australia.

I thought I'd take advantage of that insulation thing on offer even though I had a roof blanket put in last year and the girl was out this morning.  You have to pay up front and then apply for the rebate and the price has doubled since last year.

She was telling me that property investors with up to 20 homes have been getting their investment houses done.  They get a $1300 rebate for investment property whereas a home owner gets $1600 - but the costs of getting it done exceeds $1600.  My quote was $2100 and it's not a big house - last year, it was under $1,000.

It's just pushed prices up outrageously and the representative confirmed that as well.  Those with the cash to pay up front will get it done quickly and those who haven't will probably not get a chance because it cuts off at $2.5 billion.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 29^th, 2009 at 11:03am:

skippy - no I don't blame rudd for the recession. I blame the leftards that bought what they could not afford. costello said that to negate some of rudds big-noting populist whims. it's a bad policy for aussie with no benefit for the world. As howard said, he won't do it as it won't help aussie. It has not helped any country who has signed it. yes, I know what infrastructure is. putting in cable across aussie to enable people to see clips faster is not infrastructure. it will be obselete before it is up. it's a populist whim at our expense. rudd runs the media well, very few articles against him. the polls are very selective. NZ is even more leftard than aussie. thats quite a gong really -  "old fashioned rightard fascist " Greatly appreciated, never knew you cared so much. :-) Ok if I use it as a singature ?

Wow so NZ is more left wing than Australia even tho NZ has a conservative gov, just goes to show that Rudd truly is the most conservative Labor PM in this countries history and even more conservative than Menzies as many have stated.
The people to blame for the WFC are the rightard neocons sprint, they were in control when all this happened, luckily we in Australia and those in the US could see that those fascist govs were stuffing up our economy and elected some moderate govs to try and fix the greedy conservative mess they have left the world in.

mantra wrote on Apr 29^th, 2009 at 11:10am:

They should be selective about the handouts because they have been given out to anyone and everyone even those people who don't live in Australia. I thought I'd take advantage of that insulation thing on offer even though I had a roof blanket put in last year and the girl was out this morning.  You have to pay up front and then apply for the rebate and the price has doubled since last year. She was telling me that property investors with up to 20 homes have been getting their investment houses done.  They get a $1300 rebate for investment property whereas a home owner gets $1600 - but the costs of getting it done exceeds $1600.  My quote was $2100 and it's not a big house - last year, it was under $1,000. It's just pushed prices up outrageously and the representative confirmed that as well.  Those with the cash to pay up front will get it done quickly and those who haven't will probably not get a chance because it cuts off at $2.5 billion.

Well thats just not good enough .And who has the money to pay up front anyway ..inflation and capitalists stuffing it up for everyone else again as usual, the rich get richer..the poor are screwed over.

The handouts are not a bad idea but I do know someone who was overpaid by $900.00..it will be paid back later I expect when they least can afford too..they didnt return it as far as I know.

And all the others you speak of Mantra that is just such sloppy accounting..it was a good idea, but it was not targetted for maximum benefit.

mantra wrote on Apr 29^th, 2009 at 11:10am:

They should be selective about the handouts because they have been given out to anyone and everyone even those people who don't live in Australia. I thought I'd take advantage of that insulation thing on offer even though I had a roof blanket put in last year and the girl was out this morning.  You have to pay up front and then apply for the rebate and the price has doubled since last year. She was telling me that property investors with up to 20 homes have been getting their investment houses done.  They get a $1300 rebate for investment property whereas a home owner gets $1600 - but the costs of getting it done exceeds $1600.  My quote was $2100 and it's not a big house - last year, it was under $1,000. It's just pushed prices up outrageously and the representative confirmed that as well.  Those with the cash to pay up front will get it done quickly and those who haven't will probably not get a chance because it cuts off at $2.5 billion.

That's the problem with rebates, its the same for solar hot water or power, you need the money up front.
I'm not surprised that it has doubled since last year mantra, I was looking at a site last week that listed all the jobs in order of being recession proof, insulation installers came second on the list as a major growth industry.
God if that's the sort of quotes they are giving maybe I should start up an insulation business.

skippy - how do I attach a signature ??
"Traditonal rightard neocon" sounds good to me :-)


Any recession is a normally occurring event. Same as a cold.
those that borrowed money caused it.
Anyone force you to buy a plasma TV or 4X4 SUV ???

---

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 29^th, 2009 at 12:33pm:

skippy - how do I attach a signature ?? "Traditonal rightard neocon" sounds good to me :-) Any recession is a normally occurring event. Same as a cold. those that borrowed money caused it. Anyone force you to buy a plasma TV or 4X4 SUV ???

I dont have a plasma, but I've got two 4wds, but so what? I'm not in trouble.
The WFC was because rightard neocons are greedy little t urds who care for no one but them selves.
everybody knows the WFC started in the US as a result of George W Bush inadequacy to manage that economy and in turn it stuffed the world.
George W along with Howard have much to answer for and so do their supporters.

you're prob not in trouble cause you thought for yourself, like many grownups do.

US public have spent well beyond teir means for a very long time.
As have Aussie, england, NZ.

the responsibility lies with those that borrowed as much as they could.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 29^th, 2009 at 12:50pm:

you're prob not in trouble cause you thought for yourself, like many grownups do. US public have spent well beyond teir means for a very long time. As have Aussie, england, NZ. the responsibility lies with those that borrowed as much as they could.

Ha ha ha, so do I get any royalties for that signature sprint?

skippy - course you do. A 50/50 split sound ok ?
You also get an input as to the signature.
Go for it.


meanwhile, rudd shows his (jellylike) backbone.....


Quote:

WAVES of Australia-bound asylum seekers crossing from Malaysia to Indonesia have prompted the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, to send the national security adviser, Duncan Lewis, to talk with Malaysian officials about counter measures..........

http://www.smh.com.au/national/rudd-escalates-action-over-asylum-seekers-20090424-ai1n.html

Honestly, to all the leftards, however could you say rudd is "esculating action" when he sends a lacky over to talk ....????????

what rudd doubletalk is this ??

it means absolutely zilch. And shows the media prints eactly what he wants.

Ruddys "stimulus package" has failed . ie, he has given away ALL our money and more for no descernable benefit whatsoever.

Now we are in a recession, with no money.  ALP strikes again.




Quote:

KEVIN Rudd's belated acknowledgment that the Australian economy is in recession means his preferred political strategy - using the national credit card in the hope of avoiding the symbolically important technical recession, before he can credibly call a federal election - is in tatters. The key election issue was to be the Government's economic competency in managing the nation's economic difficulties. The aim was to use Rudd's high personal popularity to build an electoral buffer in case the economic situation got worse. The political danger was always that the Government could become wedged between its short-term desire to exploit its political advantage and economic circumstances largely outside its control. The Government's experiment with fiscal stimulus was to provide a point of differentiation with the Opposition's economic approach. Having a clear point of differentiation was absolutely necessary for the strategy to work. It was clear to all objective observers that Australia had entered the global financial difficulties in a better position than the majority of Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. This was primarily due to the opening up of the Australian economy by the governments of Bob Hawke and Paul Keating and the buoyant federal government revenues the Howard government had enjoyed. If Rudd were to successfully prosecute his case for economic competence he had to point to something that his Government actually did. Remember all the political spin that accompanied the fiscal stimulus? The regular government assertions that tens of thousands of jobs would be protected by the increase in government spending? In recent weeks, as it has become clear that the impact of the fiscal stimulus was overstated, the Government has resorted to the feeble claim that things would have been worse without it. Its constant revision of its economic forecast makes it clear that whatever the impact of the fiscal stimulus, at the very least its structure was based on nothing more than guesswork. This week's revelation that the Government was likely to base its budget on more optimistic economic assumptions than those provided by the International Monetary Fund in its recent global economic update is the clearest indication that it is desperate for an early election to capitalise on the Prime Minister's popularity. .........

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25410729-7583,00.html

This I agree with - this money will have to be paid back.  There's such a stuff up at the tax office that 58,000 backpackers and those on temporary work visas who have left the country are getting the $900  in some cases it has been given twice as per the news yesterday.  

With the $1400 in December - 76,000 people who resided permanently overseas received the payment and the total of these stuff ups runs into billions.

Although I prefer Rudd to Howard because he is more compassionate, he has gone to the extreme.  The overpayments made in Australia might be recuperated, but they certainly won't be recuperated from foreign workers who have gone home.

Also the IMF still considers Australia to be a wealthy country and the government has also committed to propping them up with more cash to keep the multinationals afloat in developing and third world countries.  

At the end of this not only will the people be in enormous debt as they were under Howard, but the government will also be indebted in the next couple of years to the tune of approximately $200 billion to the Chinese.

ruddy has further lured 1st time buyers into an overhyped property market.
No matter who ran it, I have always disagreed with a home buyers grant, any interference in a free market distorts it.
Eventually it has to come back to reality .



Quote:

FIRST home buyers are leaping aboard a sinking ship, with house prices set to fall about 20 per cent in the next two years, an Australian National University economist says. Professor Quentin Grafton said house prices could not continue to grow at a faster rate than incomes and consumer prices. This "property bubble" was about to deflate, he said, and first-timers, encouraged through government grants to buy at the top of the market, could be over-committed when hit by job losses and, later, higher interest rates. "First home buyers who don't have much of a deposit and can barely afford their mortgage payments on the current interest rates, they'll be in trouble," Professor Grafton said. "I wouldn't be surprised if overall we get a 20 per cent decline in nominal house prices over about the next two years." This could lead to borrowers owing more than they own, he said. "Ultimately, house prices have to be related to the ordinary prices that we pay for other goods and services and our incomes. "In the past decade, house prices have gone up about 50 per cent in terms of that ratio. That is not sustainable, and certainly won't be sustainable as the recession bites."...........

http://business.theage.com.au/business/property-bubble-set-to-burst-20090430-aoyd.html

Quote:

THE Rudd Government's compromise on emissions trading may yet fail to clear a path through the Senate for its climate scheme, with independents Nick Xenophon and Steve Fielding responding negatively to the latest changes. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd today delayed the start date of its proposed emissions trading scheme by a year to win Senate support for its Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. The measure is just one of a series a compromise measures announced by the Prime Minister in an attempt to win the support of the Greens for its climate blueprint. The package includes a very low fixed price on carbon for the first year of the scheme’s operation and extra assistance for each of the two categories of so-called trade exposed industries for the duration of the recession. It also includes the concession that the government will consider a tougher emissions reduction target of 25 per cent of 2000 levels by 2020, in the unlikely event of a global agreement designed to limit the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at 450 parts per million. Otherwise the government’s previously announced target range of 5 to 15 per cent would apply. The amendments, signed off by the Cabinet subcommittee on climate change this morning, and later announced by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd at a press conference in Canberra, are designed to win support from Malcolm Turnbull’s opposition in the Senate and appease mounting industry concern about the costs of the scheme during the global recession. But the Government will still need the support of independent Nick Xenophon and Family First’s Steve Fielding to steer the CPRS through the Senate, and both responded negatively to today’s announcement. “The governments CPRS is fundamentally flawed,” Mr Xenophon told The Australian Online. “The model is unfixable and the changes announced today are simply window-dressing. “If you give a lame duck a hair-cut, it’s still a lame duck.” Senator Xenophon said the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme still needed stronger emissions reduction targets. “The only way to achieve strong targets is to implement a fundamentally better designed scheme,” he said. Family First’s Steve Fielding said the government was “still intent on putting Australian jobs at risk” through the CPRS. “Four months ago the Prime Minister told Australians it would be ‘reckless and irresponsible’ to delay this scheme and now he has done just that,” Senator Fielding said. “I’m concerned that this government is taking a huge risk by demanding it lead the world with its climate changes scheme, and it’s a risk that will carried by the Australian people.” Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull said the Prime Minister had made a “humiliating back down”.......

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25426410-601,00.html


Also in regards to rudd luring 1st home buyers in, I see house prices last year dropped the most in 23 years
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25426654-643,00.html

Sprint I live at least 200km away from you yet I can smell your hypocrisy from here.
Who started the first home grants ,sprint?
Are you suggesting Rudd should have canned it? ,yet no bitching from you when the rodent introduced it.

Hi Skippy,
how are you ?

I don't answer rhetoric questions.
ask or make a statement yourself.

I disagree with the whole first home owners grant idea.
You ?

At last ...............



Quote:

KEVIN Rudd has retained a strong lead over Malcolm Turnbull as preferred prime minister despite a five-percentage-point slide in Labor's primary vote. Only 36 per cent of voters questioned in a weekend Newspoll, conducted exclusively for The Australian, expressed satisfaction with the Opposition Leader's performance, while 45 per cent were dissatisfied. And the Prime Minister was rated the better leader by 64 per cent of voters against 19 per cent for Mr Turnbull, whose support was unchanged from the previous poll a fortnight earlier. Mr Rudd's rating was down three percentage points. Mr Turnbull's failure to make significant ground came despite Labor's primary vote tumbling from 47 per cent to 42 per cent - dropping below its 2007 election primary vote of 43.3 per cent. The Coalition's primary vote rose by one point to 38 per cent, while the Greens were up two points to 11 per cent - well above their 2007 election result of 7.8 per cent. While Labor's two-party-preferred lead of 55 per cent to 45per cent was an improvement for the Coalition from Labor's 58-42 lead two weeks ago, the Coalition's vote was still below its 2007 election return of 42.1 per cent.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25430179-601,00.html

rudd was terrible for the qld govt. A real behind the scenes manipulator.
he stifled the qld govt within a year, noone could say peep without it going through him.
he has crippled the aussie govt.  Everything is being "delayed".  

We are in seriour debt and sinking rapidly. he gave away our cash, tied us up to kyoto.

The polls are well controlled by leftys, very specific polling, very lagging effect.


Who in their right mind would be as pleased with rudd now as when they beamingly voted for him ??

ruddfects ...........



Quote:

OPEN recreation areas have been set up as dormitories and dozens of bunk beds have been flown in to Christmas Island's detention centre, where the imminent arrival of 136 asylum seekers and boat crew is placing pressure on resources. There are already 262 asylum seekers in various forms of detention on the remote island - the highest number since the mass arrivals that preceded the Tampa stand-off in 2001. The surge that began last September has so far delivered 411 asylum seekers to Christmas Island, and the rise in numbers, although good for local businesses, has created an expensive challenge for the Government. Last week, the Department of Immigration reverted to bringing in staff, contractors and supplies on commercial flights to save about $70,000 it had been spending each Thursday on a charter flight from the mainland. Since 2001, the commonwealth has invested more than $500million in detention-related infrastructure on the island, including 162 bedsits, five duplexes and two houses for staff and community detainees, but shortages are now being felt keenly. Negotiations are under way that could allow guards and staff to live at the island's mothballed 156-room casino, and the department's review of accommodation on the island has included talks over two more blocks of flats in the suburb of Poon Saan. The department's stock of accommodation has become strained as increasing numbers of families and minors are granted community detention; last month, a group of five Sri Lankan asylum seekers was moved out of a department-owned duplex in the suburb of Drumsite and back to transportable huts on the site of the island's old detention centre to make room for new community detainees. The old detention centre, built as a temporary measure after the Tampa incident, is also being used again by immigration officials processing asylum seekers from the adjacent family compound, which houses 41 adults and children. The compound initially had a capacity of 50, but has been adapted and has held as many as 61 in recent weeks. The island's main detention centre now holds 193 single men and, as HMAS Tobruk prepares to deliver a further 136 people, it is being readied for what its staff term "surge capacity". The Tobruk is carrying three boatloads of asylum seekers. The first group was intercepted in international waters off Ashmore Reef on April 25 by the HMAS Albany and transferred to the Tobruk, which has a crew of 150 and a capacity for a further 390 people. But the Tobruk did not steam straight for Christmas Island, instead waiting off Western Australia's north coast to make two more intercepts. On April 30, the Government announced those interceptions, and the passengers are aboard the warship. The Tobruk was expected to reach Christmas Island on the weekend. Border Protection Command would not comment yesterday on speculation that it was waiting off the north of Australia to receive further passengers. While former detainees have told The Australian they stayed in comfortable single rooms at the immigration detention centre, rows of bunk beds have been set up inside dual-use rooms that can be opened up for recreation space or closed off as dormitories. The centre's Red Block, built to separate anyone who becomes violent, will be kept vacant. Christmas Island's immigration detention centre has a capacity of 400 single male adults, with a surge capacity of a further 400, which can be accommodated within the existing floor plan and framework of the centre, a department spokesman says. The Government says in the event the detention centre fills up, it is committed to finding alternative accommodation on Christmas Island. Last week, a male Sri Lankan asylum seeker who reached the mainland last November with 11 others, returned home voluntarily, becoming the third person from that boat to do so.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25424047-2702,00.html

Rudd's in the bad books again.  He has given verbal instructions to DIMIA to allow all visa overstayers a chance to remain here and redeem themselves.  Instead of detaining them when caught and immediately being put on a flight to their homeland - they can stay until further applications are processed and will be given a verbal warning only. Of course most of them will disappear immediately they've had their little talk with migration officers.

Why is he doing this?  Unemployment is escalating daily and these visa overstayers aren't contributing to the economy because they don't pay tax.  It's just exacerbating our black market.

verbal instructions !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

can't be traced back to him,  ties up more govt machinations around him.
Very unprofessional, controlling and worrying.

Quote:

JOE Hockey sharpened the Opposition's attack on the Rudd Government's economic management today, accusing Kevin Rudd of spending $10 million each hour since his election in 2007.......

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25512082-601,00.html

Good old Hockey, good at overeating but not much else.

Love their line "our deficit would be $25bn lower" presumably because they wouldn't have done the second lot of handouts or tax rebates.

So simplistic it can only come from the Lieberal Party; not attempt to calculate the higher unemployment/lower company tax/higher dole payments by withholding the tax rebates.

Rudd/Swan/Tanner are doing all the right things so far.

FHOG means the price droo of house prices is slow and steady, not some confidence-sapping crash.

Migrants are a great economic stimulus, and even the illegal overstayers pay tax: the ATO does not give a stuff if you are a criminal or visa overstayer, they just want their tax due.

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 20^th, 2009 at 8:34pm:

[quote]JOE Hockey sharpened the Opposition's attack on the Rudd Government's economic management today, accusing Kevin Rudd of spending $10 million each hour since his election in 2007.......

Hockey is just bright enough to tie his shoe laces. But not bright enough to distinguish spending from a drop in tax revenue.

the leftards have backflipped, again.


Quote:

Share schemes: Swan to feast on humble pie THE federal Government looks set to make a 180-degree U-turn in the next month over employee share schemes, thanks to some careless pre-budget advice over tax treatment that threatens to reduce the amount the Australian Taxation Office nets from such arrangements. Wayne Swan announced on budget night last week that from then on, tax on such schemes would be payable upfront, closing off the choice that participants had enjoyed of paying tax at the time they sold their relevant shares and options. The Treasurer's rhetoric described "a package of measures to improve fairness and integrity in the tax system" and "an ongoing gain to revenue estimated to be $200 million" over the following three years. But it has emerged since that the measure will largely miss the sophisticated "non-qualifying" executive share schemes that are reportedly leaking about $90million a year of potential tax revenue. That is because participants in those more complex schemes have already been paying income tax upfront, in order to enjoy a concessional rate of capital gains tax at the far end. This is the unintended consequence of the introduction of a concessional rate of CGT payable on options and shares held for over a year, brought in in 1999. Share option grantees have enjoyed tax rates as low as 6per cent by paying upfront, using an entirely legal "Black and Scholes" based option valuation formula. And just as bad but far more widely felt has been Treasury's move to force the 2million or so employee participants in simpler "qualifying" share schemes to pay tax upfront, which has removed any incentive for employees to go into them and caused a raft of major corporates to either suspend or cancel their schemes. It has also caused major newspapers to boil with politically damaging employee shareholder indignation for almost two weeks. .........

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25523603-5017978,00.html


is there anything they have got right so far ??????????

lol working on a list for Mr "mean and tricky" Rudd...  geez even in the last 2 months there are heaps.  This'll be fun if I get enough time.

heres the work board for it...

Quote:

Mean and Tricky… MEAN Shares debacle in buget Pension age change April 2009 Rudd reduced a young female RAAF cabin attendant to tears with a tirade of abuse because he did not get a meal he wanted during a VIP flight. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's short fuse trigger exodus of personal staff. May 2009 THE capacity of the uncaring PM Rudd Labor and his governmentt to hurt the weakest and most vulnerable Australians is epitomised by its decision to slash Medicare reimbursement for cataract surgery from November from $623.70 to $311.85, or by about 50 per cent. PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd is facing fresh allegations of an explosive temper after claims he threw a "wobbly" over a hairdryer in Afghanistan. TRICKY Mens club Qld legal case shredded Lies about wheat board funds Town cam takeovers Delays ETS Gov wont take over public health May 2009

feel free to add.

grendel - maybe there is also room for the "Forgotten populisms" list.

eg, fuel watch, grocery watch, kyoto, apology, economic conservative ...
All populisms that have been forgotten.
Some will be damaging, some not.
But all pointless and self serving



Quote:

SOMETIMES you can just smell a transitional week in politics, even without knowing about the party research to back up your olfactory senses. More about the party research in a minute. First to the straws now blowing in the shifting winds. Did you catch the ABC's Insiders yesterday morning? As a regular panellist on the show, I naturally regard the program as required viewing. It's kind of like breakfast at the Cafe Beltway. And most of Canberra's political class never likes to miss their muesli. And that's on an ordinary weekend. But yesterday was something different. Sunday it was compulsory viewing for one reason; almost the entire program was devoted to ridiculing the Rudd Government. This is exceptional, because normally Insiders is broadly a serious and balanced program. Not yesterday. And the fact it wasn't was not a result of intent but rather a function of the fact that the behaviour of the Rudd Government demanded it. First, The Australian's Paul Kelly ripped into Labor for its triumph of spin over substance. He was referring, of course, to the ongoing comedy routine, set up initially by the budget speech in which Wayne Swan refused to name the deficit figure, through to this week where neither Swan nor Kevin Rudd would utter the "b" word. That's "b" for billions, which both men comically tried to avoid saying in the ensuing days when it came to mentioning the "d" word - "debt" - in the same sentence. Like the old Stan Cross cartoon, somebody should've told them they should stop making us laugh because this situation was serious. At the start of the budget process, Rudd announced that he welcomed Malcolm Turnbull's invitation to debate "debt and deficit". Except to debate something, you have to actually utter sentences that make sense, a process Rudd is now apparently incapable of engaging in when it comes to the economy. Kelly made these points eloquently and more economically than me. The panel then followed up with a discussion peppered with the same flavour. All that was missing was the question "Just which episode of The Hollowmen did the tactical geniuses behind Rudd and Swan think they were in when they dreamed up this strategy?" The strategy apparently being to no longer talk about the economy they said was so important before the budget, because after the budget it no longer fitted their message. That message being that everything's under control. Which, in the case of debt and deficit, it most clearly is not. Which is why they don't want to talk about it. All that was missing was Rob Sitch promoting the idea of "future-proofing" without knowing what it meant. But the piece de resistance on Insiders was Mike Bowers's regular Talking Pictures segment which he and cartoonist Reg Lynch presented in hard hats and fluoro jackets. And all they discussed were the endless photos of Rudd et al in hard hats and fluoro jackets. As Bowers observed, anybody who had a pulse in the ministry was wearing one of each this week as they attempted to hammer home (forgive the pun) the message that the budget was all about nation building. Would people forgive them, asked Bowers, for blowing a bloody great hole in the budget justbecause they were wearing hardhats? To which Lynch replied. "No, I think most of your average people would just laugh and say: 'You look stupid in a hard hat."'

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25531333-33435,00.html

Wheres peter garrett when the environment needs him ??
Flying around the world, chasing ruddy I guess.



Quote:

The federal Government says it expects a planned new uranium mine in Western Australia to get the go ahead. BHP Billiton wants to build the mine at Yeelirrie in the state's mid-west, and it is seeking environmental approval. BHP is hoping to capitalise on increasing demand for uranium, and the proposed mine is expected to open in 2014 and will be the first major uranium mine in Australia in more than 20 years. Australia's has the world's biggest uranium reserves, and most governments around the country are eager to make the most of a lucrative commodity. Federal Resources Minister, Martin Ferguson, says he supports BHP Billiton's plan to mine the Yeelirrie uranium deposit in Western Australia. "The Australian Government's policy is very clear; we support the expansion of uranium mining," he said. "It creates new investment opportunities for Australia and important export earnings. "I'll continue to work with the Western Australian Government to bring on investments not only in the LNG sector, but also the uranium and a range of other resource sectors, because these private sector investments create jobs and they are so important as we dig our way out of this economic slowdown." The Western Australian Government lifted the state's ban on uranium mining in November, and WA Mines Minister, Norman Moore, says the mine will be approved if it meets the government's regulations. "Provided they meet all the requirements of the Government, we've always said that we would allow uranium mining, but only on the basis that the companies who want to engage in that activity are subject to the most stringent environmental and safety conditions," he said. "So we will look very carefully at their proposal; if they meet our obligations and requirements then they can go ahead." BHP Billiton also owns the world's biggest uranium mine, Olympic Dam, and its seeking approval for a huge expansion. Resources analyst, Gavin Wendt, from Fat Prophets says development of Yeelirrie is important for the company's future. "It's a tremendously important deal. Firstly that it's the first uranium development in Western Australia, it's the second largest undeveloped uranium deposit within Australia," he said. "BHP at the present time is implementing a massive expansion of its Olympic Dam operation in South Australia. This is set to overtake the Ranger uranium mine by ERA up in the Northern Territory. "So it really is going to establish BHP as a major uranium player at a time when the world is increasingly going to be looking towards nuclear power as an alternate energy source." But Mr Wendt says there will be environmental concerns in the local community. "I think that is why all new planned uranium developments have to be squeaky clean in terms of environmental issues," he said. The plan to mine uranium in Western Australia already faces strong community opposition; the state Government says it will not allow uranium to be shipped out of its ports, so it will have to be sent by rail to Darwin or Adelaide. Piers Vestegen from the Conservation Council of Western Australia says there is a big risk of Australian uranium ending up in the wrong hands. "We don't believe that there are safeguards that are strong enough to ensure that Western Australian yellowcake will not end up in nuclear weapons," he said. "And mining uranium in Western Australia we know will have a major impact on communities and will have a major impact on the environment. "So nuclear energy is really not the solution to climate change - the solution to climate change lies in Western Australia's abundant supplies in renewable energy, and this is what we should be focussing on in Western Australia, not the dangerous nuclear industry that will be of no benefit to West Australians." However, WA Mines Minister, Norman Moore, says he thinks people will support uranium mining. "There is a growing acceptance in the community that uranium mining should be allowed to go ahead in Western Australia," he said. "You would be aware that we went to the election on the basis of having uranium mining. It didn't seem to be a significant issue in the election in that context." But Piers Vestegen says the ban on transporting yellowcake out of the state's ports is an acknowledgment that the community does not support the industry. "Well the West Australian Government has really admitted that it's not a good practice to be shipping yellowcake through communities," he said. "There's no support for this industry in Western Australia, and people living around West Australian ports will not support the transport of yellowcake through their communities."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/22/2578579.htm

Yes Sprintcyclist - that is very disappointing. Garrett is useless and should be sacked. Rudd is hopeless, gutless & a huge disappointment, but he's still not as obnoxious as the previous PM although at the rate he's going he'll soon catch up.


Nuclear proponents are playing down the vast environmental impacts and health risks of allowing a uranium mine in WA, the Australian Greens say.

“The latest proposal by BHP Billiton for a mine at Yeelirie, 550 kilometres east of Geraldton, would employ at most 700 people for a period of two years, after which the proponents say it would employ less half that number, all of whom will be fly-in, fly-out,” Greens Nuclear Spokesman Senator Scott Ludlam said.

“This is a relatively small number of new jobs, especially compared to renewable energies such as solar, which has created lasting employment for 250,000 people in Germany.

“In its referral document to the Federal Department of Environment, BHP revealed that through an on-site leaching process, the proposed mine would produce 110 million tonnes of radioactive waste.

“It proposes that this huge amount of rock and sludge would be stored at the mine site in an open pit or tailings dam, where it would remain dangerously radioactive for tens of thousands of years.

“This means that once the mine opens, mine workers and anyone else in the area would be at risk on windy days of breathing in dust or radon gas blown off the tailings. These radioactive materials greatly increase the risk of cancer if ingested.

“BHP says 10,000 hectares of mostly well vegetated land would be disturbed by the mine and this area is home to six threatened animal species, 11 migratory birds and a number of rare and priority-listed plant species.  The site experiences intense rain at times, causing water to flow in sheets off the proposed mine site towards nearby lakes.

“Bearing in mind that the Federal Government recently admitted that 100,000 litres of contaminated groundwater is seeping from tailings at Ranger uranium mine into Kakadu each day, the potential impact of large-scale dewatering of the mine site at Yeelirie combined with heavy downpours is alarming.

“The mine’s yellowcake product is proposed to be taken inside sealed drums on existing roads from Yeelirie to a “secure” rail facility near Kalgoorlie and then by train to Adelaide and then Darwin before going overseas.

“If we count this with the vast amount of embedded energy that goes into building a nuclear reactor, it is hard to see how anyone can possibly describe this industry as a low-carbon solution to greenhouse gas emissions,” Senator Ludlam said.

“However, this large amount of overland travel within Australia raises another concern. According to the Federal Department of Infrastructure and Transport, there are more than 2,000 serious truck accidents on WA roads each year, while the Australian Transport Safety Bureau reports there are on average more than 35 serious train derailments and collisions annually in WA.

“Yellowcake powder, or uranium oxide concentrate, is the consistency of talcum powder – so should a serious road or rail collision occur, people using the same transport routes or living nearby would be at risk of breathing in the dust. This could be disastrous for their health.

“The direct risks to health from this proposed mine are serious enough to rule it out.

“In the 10 years since multinational, Pangea, was in Australia lobbying hard for the establishment of an international nuclear waste here, the global nuclear industry has still not developed a solution to its waste problem.

“If a uranium mine opens in WA, WA can once again expect international pressure to take global nuclear waste.”

here is one with an interesting twist ........



Quote:

THE maker of popular alcohol mixed drinks such as Vodka Cruiser and Woodstock Bourbon is blaming the alcopops tax hike for looming job losses. The Independent Distillers Group manufacturers and distributes alcoholic beverages worldwide and has a factory in Laverton in Melbourne's west. The group's Peter Murphy warned today the 70 per cent alcopops tax hike has sparked a sales downturn that has already led to 23 job losses. "We are at risk now of having to close our factory," he said. "That will cost 135 working Australians in the western suburbs of Melbourne their jobs." Mr Murphy said the tax was responsible for a 30 per cent sales slump. The Laverton facility is the group's only factory in Australia and it was considering moving production to New Zealand, he said. Mr Murphy said alcopops represented only 6 per cent of the total alcohol market. "To put a tax on that small portion of the market will never have an impact on binge drinking," he said. "We have been singled out. We think it's a much more sensible approach to address this issue across the whole industry and tax all products equally." The alcopops tax hike was rejected by the Senate in March, when Family First's Steve Fielding sided with the opposition to vote the measure down. The Government plans to reintroduce the legislation into parliament after June 18, meaning it could become a double dissolution trigger if it fails again.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25536189-12377,00.html


do the leftards WANT a double dissoultion ???

rudd is totally awful, but he ain't a fool.
he's a political animal

he's getting hammered. Why did the media NOT question him before the election ????



Quote:

ACCORDING to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, the blame for the economic hardship being faced by Australians must be shared by the effects of the global financial crisis and the policies of the former Howard conservative government. But the gloss is starting to rub off this spin as it becomes increasingly obvious that the policies of the Rudd Labor Government are, in fact, a major threat to job security. Wearing his ever-present hard hat, our shovel-ready prime minister has been scurrying around the country missing no photo opportunity to push the message that the billions of dollars he has thrown at infrastructure projects will create a jobs bonanza. The reality is that the bulk of jobs triggered by these projects, if they get off the ground, will be created well down the track. In the meantime the Government's emissions trading scheme is threatening to kill thousands of existing jobs while Labor's new industrial relations laws, which come into effect on July 1, will discourage employers from hiring new staff. Neither of these have anything to do with the global financial crisis. But they are aimed at reversing policies of the Howard government. Since he became Opposition leader at the end of 2006, Rudd has revealed himself as an economic chameleon (some might unkindly prefer the term economic opportunist). Anyway, during the 2007 election campaign, against the backdrop of a surging economy and near full employment, he was happy to describe himself as an economic conservative. But since winning government he has eschewed the evils of neo-liberalism and embraced the cause of social democracy. Rudd justifies trashing the policies of the Howard government by arguing they were an extension of the free market culture which was the root cause of the slump in world financial markets. The result is a dramatic rise in the role of the state, a sort of father-knows-best solution which is turning us into a nation of dependents. The seeds for this social change were sown in the recent budget and reflect the sort of policy of envy that emerged during the brief career of Mark Latham as Labor leader. For example, the decision to means test the private health insurance rebate threatens to force more people on to the public health system, even though it is unable to cope with existing demand. And the decision to scrap the tax benefit for employee share schemes, replacing it with an upfront surcharge, is justified as a move against rorts forhighly paid executives. What it actually does is remove an employment incentive that is not the sole prerogative of the top end of the workforce. The upshot has been a storm of protest not just from employers but also from unions. Meanwhile the Government dismisses as unreliable industry forecasts that thousands of jobs will be lost through the establishment of its emissions trading scheme. It views this industry response as an unwarranted obstruction to the creation of a social engineering platform that will protect future generations of Australians even if the justification for this assumption is vague to say the least. But the concerns of employer groups are being echoed by mining and construction industry unions, which have been doing their own polling on the employment implications of this policy on their members and as a result are turning up the heat on the Government. The upshot of all this is to heighten the level of community uncertainty at a time when Rudd professes to be doing everything in his power to restore confidence in the country's future. But what it does do is open the door for conservative leader, Malcolm Turnbull, to re-establish the Opposition's economic management credentials. So far, he has largely focused on the long-term effects of Rudd's debt deficit budgeting. This is all very well but with an election no more than 18 months away Turnbull needs to crystallise this issue into hip-pocket terms with a clear focus on job insecurity that resonates with voters who recently received a maximum $900 handout from the Government and are paying the lowest mortgage interest rates that many have ever experienced. This is no easy task. Comparisons with the economic turmoil under the Whitlam Labor government in the 1970s, while looking increasingly justified, would be lost on many youngvoters. Nevertheless the only hope for Turnbull is to convince the electorate that the Rudd Government has lost its way, and instead of leading the country out of the economic wilderness, it is heading deeper into its darkrecesses.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25537559-5015019,00.html

In all fairness - Howard did have an easy ride with the economic boom. He and Keating had a lot in common and Keating did set a precedent which was easy for the Howard government to follow. Howard paid off a lot of government debt by offloading it onto the people.

The problem is - Rudd is only experienced as a diplomat and is making some terrible decisions - it's obvious he is very uncertain of what path to take, but he is pretending to be confidant.

The only credence I can give Rudd is that he is more human than Howard ever was - so today we have two choices - humanity and uncertainty or a complete revival of the class system where the divide between rich and poor becomes even more obvious.

This is sad, rudd is spinning for himself.
What unabashed shameless cheesey advertising.
Maybe he should wear a tshirt saying "Kevvy is kool".




Quote:

Kevin Rudd has demeaned the office of prime minister by using "silly" props during parliamentary question time, opposition frontbencher Julie Bishop says. Mr Rudd held up large pictures of schools at the dispatch box on Thursday to illustrate his government's stimulus spending programs for schools. In response, opposition treasury spokesman Joe Hockey had his frontbencher colleagues help him unfurl a six-sheet chart of graphs showing Labor debt. Asked about the antics of politicians in parliament, Ms Bishop said Mr Rudd was not acting like a prime minister. "I've never seen a prime minister stoop to the sort of silly antics that we saw this week," she told ABC Television. Mr Rudd was playing with "silly props, and all sorts of antics which were quite demeaning of the office of prime minister".....

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-national/rudd-demeaning-pms-office-bishop-20090529-bpf3.html

Could this one be rudds big mistake ?
It's funny how some small things become a symbol of a larger gather,  momentum and then bring into focus earlier larger flaws.

For a labor govt, they have really erred here.


Quote:

Kevin Rudd's apology to the stolen generations was notable for many reasons. There were those who saw it as a removal of a "stain from the soul of Australia", as the Prime Minister put it, and for many Aborigines it was a big step forward in relations between themselves and government. Fast-forward 12 months. The light that brightened the spirits of many indigenous Australians has gradually been extinguished by the Rudd Government's repressive moves. In rural and regional Australia, many Aboriginal people now face the realities of life under a government that appears to have put rhetoric ahead of reconciliation. The Rudd Government has announced it will close all "non-remote" community development employment programs at the end of June. The decision has left many Aborigines wondering why; despite the Government's sloganeering about "closing the gap" they are feeling increasingly alienated. For far too long, the old adage that the road to hell is paved with good intentions has been an apt description of governmental policy on indigenous employment programs. But community development employment programs gave many communities a workable solution. For decades, these programs - while not perfect - provided an ideal platform for Aboriginal people to gain practical skills. They had an instrumental role in fostering a sense of self-belief, while breaking dependence on the welfare system. The apparently simple act of tending a public park in Moree or repairing an aged pensioner's roof in Gunnedah provides someone with a sense of purpose and belonging. In "remote" and "non-remote" towns, the programs have given many Aboriginal people a reason to get up in the morning. The closure of such a large number of programs strikes at the heart of the notion of social inclusion and economic independence and steers the ship back towards a closed welfare state. For many communities, a community development employment program was the first realistic and viable solution that gave them a genuine sense of empowerment. In north-west NSW, the local program of the Boggabilla and Toomelah communities will close on June 30. Toomelah was selected as the first town in the state to have such a program, after horrific reports that emerged in the wake of a visit in 1987 by then president of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Marcus Einfeld. Today it supports 85 jobs and provides employees to major regional centres, such as Moree and Goondiwindi. At the end of June these workers will transfer to Newstart. The Government has overlooked the negative effect its decision will have on local businesses and fails to recognise the extent to which the programs have become integral to local economies. Take the Gunnedah district of about 12,000 people on the flood plains of the Upper Namoi Valley, prosperous thanks to mineral and agricultural wealth. An Aboriginal elder, Dick Talbot, created the Gunida Gunyah Aboriginal Corporation, armed with nothing more than a couple of lawnmowers and practical desire to help his people. In two years, it has created 140 jobs and encouraged local Aborigines into diverse traineeships in child welfare, horticulture, indigenous land management and business administration. Since the Government announced the organisation would be shut, the outcry from the town's business community has been fierce. I have been overwhelmed with letters of support, from pensioners who use the service to maintain their gardens to a large-scale coal mining operation that uses the workforce for advice on mine rehabilitation. The message has been the same: it will be a major loss to the entire Gunnedah community when Gunida Gunya ceases to operate. Community development employment programs have succeeded where many others have failed because they foster a sense of ownership among employees. Gunnedah's Aboriginal community leaders have told me that for many people, closing the program will breach their fundamental human right to education, training and employment in their own communities. It is a valid point. The logic that a government can implement such a "one-size-fits-all" approach is as dated as it is flawed. Allowing indigenous communities to help themselves is a key part in reducing disadvantage. The Rudd Government needs to recognise that if it truly wants to close the gap, it must start with scrapping its plans to scale back the community development employment programs.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/rudd-steers-ship-back-to-a-closed-welfare-state-20090528-boxc.html

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 29^th, 2009 at 12:18pm:

… Quote: … Take the Gunnedah district of about 12,000 people on the flood plains of the Upper Namoi Valley, prosperous thanks to mineral and agricultural wealth. An Aboriginal elder, Dick Talbot, created the Gunida Gunyah Aboriginal Corporation, armed with nothing more than a couple of lawnmowers and practical desire to help his people. In two years, it has created 140 jobs and encouraged local Aborigines into diverse traineeships in child welfare, horticulture, indigenous land management and business administration. Since the Government announced the organisation would be shut, the outcry from the town's business community has been fierce. I have been overwhelmed with letters of support, from pensioners who use the service to maintain their gardens to a large-scale coal mining operation that uses the workforce for advice on mine rehabilitation. The message has been the same: it will be a major loss to the entire Gunnedah community when Gunida Gunya ceases to operate. Community development employment programs have succeeded where many others have failed because they foster a sense of ownership among employees. Gunnedah's Aboriginal community leaders have told me that for many people, closing the program will breach their fundamental human right to education, training and employment in their own communities. … http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/rudd-steers-ship-back-to-a-closed-welfare-state-20090528-boxc.html

If it was such a success, why they don’t open their own Company?

I’ll have a guess, it was not cash positive, kind of money drain, wrong?

mantra wrote on May 26^th, 2009 at 10:17am:

The only credence I can give Rudd is that he is more human than Howard ever was

Based on what? That he does not hesitate to utter platitudes? As a matter of record, he has done nothing but utter platitudes and give your children's money to you to squander on petty acquisition.

Howard thought and acted lke a suburban lawyer - that is, like you or your neighbour.

Soren wrote on May 29^th, 2009 at 7:47pm:

... Howard thought and acted lke a suburban lawyer - that is, like you or your neighbour.

I don't know if somebody broke to tears because of Howard's manners.

Kevin gave few performances already.

happy - yes, i'ld be quite sure the Gunida Gunyah Aboriginal Corporation was not financially viable on a business standard.

But it gave much more to the community than that, and that's exactly what labor is all about.

Or, are meant to be all about.

Howard's very substance was his ordinariness and being comfortable with that. Australia gained enormously by also becoming confident (rather than feeling inferior) by it's own decent ordinariness. Looking around the world, that is now recognised as an enormous achievement and Australians recognise that and no longer feel even slightly ashamed of it, like Keating did (a great guy, by the way, of a dfferent calling, not a man for a crisis.)

Ruddocchio? Who the bugger is he?

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 29^th, 2009 at 8:40pm:

happy - yes, i'ld be quite sure the Gunida Gunyah Aboriginal Corporation was not financially viable on a business standard. But it gave much more to the community than that, and that's exactly what labor is all about. Or, are meant to be all about.

Yes, wouldn't be bad idea to apply it to all fella too.

Using the same argument Pacific Brands should be saved too as it employed indiscriminately.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 13^th, 2009 at 10:54am:

"THE nation's tourism sector has slammed the Rudd Government for not coming to the aid of the struggling industry despite giving billions to the car industry, saying they were placed at the "back of the line" because they did not have union backing. The attack came as figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics yesterday showed the number of foreign visitors to Australia plummeted 5.1 per cent in November compared to the previous year. The number of travellers heading overseas outstripped the number of foreign visitors to the country by more than 35,000 -- the biggest tourist deficit in 23years. Industry leaders, due to meet informally today with staff from Tourism Minister Martin Ferguson's office, yesterday said an economic assistance package was essential to head off major job losses. Australian Tourism Export Council managing director Matthew Hingerty said: "It (tourism industry assistance) is going to cost the taxpayer significantly less than the car industry funding package. "But there's a pattern emerging here, and that is if you're an industry backed by a large unionised workforce, you can expect assistance -- otherwise you're at the back of the line." Kevin Rudd announced a $6.2billion assistance package for the car industry in November. Mr Hingerty said he was "taken aback" by the sharp drop-off in overseas visitors, which was more dramatic than expected. He said forecasts pointed to a further 4.2 per cent slump in foreign visitors this year, which represented a $1billion fall in export revenue, or 200,000 visitors. Since a peak in July, the number of visitors in November from the US dropped 9.5 per cent, from Japan 14.1 per cent, China 9.7 per cent and Singapore 10.1 per cent, in seasonally adjusted terms. ......" http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24904670-2702,00.html

So do you blame Rudd for all of that?

Athos - do I blame rudd for all what ???

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 30^th, 2009 at 11:09pm:

Athos - do I blame rudd for all what ???

For all this statistic crap.

Athos - yes I do

how timely.

rudd the "controlling meeting man and promise breaker."


Quote:

A REPORT on ministerial staffing has shed light on how hard Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and his ministers have been pushing their workers. Staff have to work seven days a week, sometimes 14 hours a day, with cabinet meetings held nearly weekly, the report shows. And there is a keen appetite for briefings. The confirmation that staff are being run ragged has led to a recommendation the Prime Minister reverse some of the deep cuts into staff numbers made in his first year in office. The review, by former senior bureaucrat Alan Henderson, found that ministerial advisers and media staff typically work more than 80 hours a week when Parliament is sitting — and only 10 hours a week less at other times of the year. The report, obtained by Seven News, laid the blame in part on modern technology. "In an age of hand-held messaging devices, the 'working' day has the potential to never end if an issue is on the boil," Mr Henderson wrote. But the intensity of work under Mr Rudd has increased significantly: in 2008, Mr Rudd hosted 45 cabinet meetings, compared to 34 hosted by former prime minister John Howard in 2006. Meetings of committees of cabinet, including the national security committee, leapt to 137, from 62 two years prior. Prior to the last election, Mr Rudd pledged to cut ministerial staff levels by 30 per cent. After nearly achieving that target by the start of this year, the report recommends increasing staff by 42 to 376. But that increase falls short of the 72 extra staff requested by ministers and parliamentary secretaries. The budget earlier this month set aside money for more staff.

meetings are unproductive in themselves.
the fewer the meetings the better.

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/rudd-staff-run-ragged-in-80hour-weeks-20090530-bqqz.html

Another bad headline.


Quote:

Rudd fights his way down the boulevard of broken dreams. The jury is still out on Kevin Rudd. In many ways he's a welcome change from the veiled harshness of John Howard, but I'm still left wondering whether he's got the personal discipline and public toughness to be a successful prime minister. A big part of the problem is that he wants to be everything and do everything. He takes on too much and gets far too involved in the detail. In consequence, everything runs late, decisions are made at the last minute and the elements are thrown together just before announcement - or left to be worked out later. More seriously, he wants his Government to be the best at everything. Big on foreign affairs, big on defence, big on education, big on relations with the states, big on Closing the Gap, big on modernising infrastructure and big on a dozen other things. Trouble is, being big in any of these areas costs big money. Trying to be big in all of them costs more than we could ever afford. But Rudd also wants to be big on keeping taxes low, big on being an "economic conservative', big on spending to mitigate the recession and big on getting the budget back into surplus and eliminating the public debt. John Pierce, the former secretary of the NSW Treasury, was once asked how you knew whether something was a priority. "When you're willing to give up something to achieve it," was his answer. Rudd wants everything to be a priority, but doesn't seem willing to give up anything much to establish any real priorities. This could mean Malcolm Turnbull is right and he'll prove to be just another Whitlam-like reckless spender. But I doubt it. In the end he'll be forced to choose, and all the argy-bargy of the past three weeks tells us what his choice will be. He's incapable of hiding the inferiority he feels to the Liberals on economic management and the Libs think their best hope lies in skewering him on deficits and debt, so that's what will win in the end.....

http://business.smh.com.au/business/rudd-fights-his-way-down-the-boulevard-of-broken-dreams-20090531-bro6.html

rudds getting flogged from pillar to post.

it's always something when unions dislike labor.


Quote:

Union fury at Julia Gillard's backdown UNION boss Sharan Burrow has urged Kevin Rudd to intervene in Labor's contentious award modernisation process after Julia Gillard took action the ACTU president warned risked turning restaurant and cafe workers into "second-class citizens". The ACTU secretary also called for the Prime Minister to ensure there were no further attempts to create more lenient awards for workers in other industries. .............

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25573107-601,00.html

the rest of the article dissolves into laughable leftard rhetoric and gobbledegook without a shred of financial honesty.

Quote:

Internet filter: $44.5m and no goal in sight The Rudd Government's internet censorship policy will cost about $90,000 per blocked web address to implement and the Government has admitted it has not developed any criteria to determine whether trials of the scheme are a success. The Opposition, Greens and online users' lobby group Electronic Frontiers Australia are concerned the lack of success criteria is a sign the policy itself has no clear goals and is instead being dictated by what the technology will allow. Nine ISPs are trialling the web censorship plan, which will mandatorily block all content that has been "refused classification" by the Australian Communications and Media Authority. Results of the trials are due to be published in July but, in response to a freedom of information request, the Government has admitted that "there are not success criteria as such". "This exposes a major shortcoming in the Government's approach," Opposition communications spokesman Nick Minchin said. Greens senator Scott Ludlam said: "It sounds as though we'll filter as many sites as the technology allows us to ... that's the reason I think people are so concerned about this in that it seems to be really open-ended." EFA spokesman Colin Jacobs said: "The pilot seems to have been a political exercise in deflecting criticism. Without any benchmarks, the Government can claim it was a success regardless of the cost or performance issues that ISPs encounter." ISP engineer and filtering critic Mark Newton said: "If I spent several hundred thousand dollars on a technology trial at work without having any idea about what the trial was attempting to test, I'd probably be out of a job.".....

http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/web/2009/06/03/1243708489312.html


http://images.smh.com.au/2009/05/05/505144/rudd65-90x60.jpg

really, this rudd govt is turning out to be mush worse than I had imagined.
we're reallly phucked.

The left is lost.
Now giving away millions to the best equipped private primary schools.

All you common working lefty persons, you voted for this.


Labor's largesse to private primary schools


Quote:

ELITE private schools that boast of their superior facilities were handed hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funding for new libraries, halls and refurbished classrooms yesterday. Education Minister Julia Gillard - who is insisting that she be personally invited to open new facilities in all the nation's 9540 schools - yesterday defended as equitable the decision to give infrastructure funding to some of the nation's wealthiest primary schools. She announced $3.1 billion for schools in Queensland, Victoria and South Australia yesterday, under the second funding round for Primary Schools in the 21st Century (P21) program. Private schools will receive $537 million - or 17 per cent - of the second-round funding, with 63 per cent going to public schools and 20 per cent to Catholic schools. Geelong Grammar School's junior campus in Melbourne's Toorak - which boasts in its prospectus of "light-filled, carefully designed" classrooms, its music and art studios, and its "well-equipped" theatre and science facilities - will receive $2m for classroom renovations and extensions. Melbourne's elite Haileybury College, which charges up to $18,000 a year in fees for primary students, has been granted $3m for a two-level library and resource building. Scotch College at Hawthorn will receive $3m for a "multipurpose hall extension". The school's prospectus shows it already has "fully equipped classrooms with the latest resources in computer, television and video", with specialist buildings for music, a "well-stocked" library and technology centre, a multi-purpose assembly hall and a computer centre with "state-of-the-art hardware". Another exclusive Melbourne school, Wesley College, also gained $3m for a multipurpose sports hall. Brisbane Grammar School - which promotes its "outstanding learning and teaching facilities" - received $2m for a new multipurpose centre. "Apart from ample general classroom spaces, the school has an airconditioned, computerised library which accommodates 200 readers and around 100,000 books and other reference resources," the school's prospectus states. "Specialist learning facilities include well-equipped science laboratories, computer rooms and additional computer workstations within various subject areas." St Margaret's Anglican School in the exclusive Brisbane suburb of Ascot has received $1.46m for a multipurpose hall and $542,000 for new verandas and stairs. Its primary school has a library, music room and computer lab, and each airconditioned classroom has a fridge. The prestigious Scotch College at Torrens Park, in the Adelaide foothills, has won $1.085m for a Year 7 learning centre, as well as $642,588 for a multipurpose hall extension and classroom. Its junior school campus boasts "12 attractive hectares of playgrounds, landscaped gardens and modern teaching facilities".....

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25613558-601,00.html

Yes - Rudd has stuffed up badly. Everyone is angry with him and we thought Howard favoured private over public. Rudd has just enhanced Howard's policies.

The Smith Family the other day was calling for donations for computers for public school kids which is outrageous. Private schools have got the broadband connections and the teachers so have received the first round. So far only about 30% of schools have received them and it is now believed it will take up to 20 years for the rest of them to be rolled out.

his ETS has no friends.


Quote:

THE Federal Government's emissions trading scheme will never pass the Senate in its current form, South Australian Independent Senator Nick Xenophon says. Senator Xenophon said scheme was deeply flawed and failed to address crucial environmental issues. He said the Government had no hope of meeting its objective to get legislation backing the scheme through the Senate before the winter precess begins on June 29. He urged the Government to "come to its senses" and negotiate with himself, the Greens and Family First Senator Steve Fielding. The senator said he was not a climate-change sceptic but believed a scheme to reduce Australia's carbon emissions must "solve something". The scheme, as it currently stood, failed that test given its inherent design flaws and failure to address crucial environmental issues, he said. "The Government's plan is all stick and no carrot," Senator Xenophon said. "It punishes clean and dirty industries alike, punishing the dirty ones just a little more. "It's also economically inefficient, pumping billions of dollars out of the economy and into the Government's coffers. "And then we are meant to trust the Government to magically redistribute most of this money back in the economy and business without distorting the economy. "All that for a fixed (reduction) target of five per cent." He noted that Senator Fielding had brought some "flare" to the debate following his trip to the United States recently. Senator Fielding last week met with climate-change sceptics who blamed global warming on solar flares, not human activity or carbon emissions. He said the scientists he met with on the self-funded trip seemed to have convincing evidence to support their case and he declared he was now on a mission to find the real cause of climate change.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25615460-5003402,00.html

Quote:

From ABC, 10 Jun. 09 http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/10/2593768.htm?section=justin ARBIB REJECTS KINGMAKER MANTLE The new Minister for Employment Participation, Mark Arbib, has denied claims his appointment was payment for aiding Kevin Rudd's rise to power. Senator Arbib, the former New South Wales ALP general secretary, has been described as one of the most powerful figures in the state's right wing faction. His new role places him at the centre of the rollout of the Government's stimulus packages, despite being elected to a Senate position as recently as the last Federal Election. "Most of my job is related to the stimulus package," he told ABC1's Lateline. "That's the frontline of what the Government is doing in terms of supporting jobs during the global recession." On Lateline Senator Arbib was pressed about claims he was instrumental in securing the numbers for Kevin Rudd to topple Kim Beazley. But the Senator has downplayed his role in the Prime Minister's success. "I was one of the people, Tony, who was involved in helping Kevin Rudd. That is true. I can't deny that. But there were many others who did that," he said. "But in the end the real truth is that Kevin Rudd got himself elected." Senator Arbib says the latest ministry appointments are based on merit. "In terms of this ministry, the Prime Minister didn't have to go out and consult the factions," he said. "I mean, the actual laws of the caucus have changed so that the Prime Minister can pick his own ministry and I think that is such a positive change for the way the Labor Party does business in this country." The NSW Senator also denies he is part of the Prime Minister's inner circle. "If you want to know who Kevin Rudd's inner circle is, Julia Gillard would be the key person in the Prime Minister's inner circle and people like John Faulkner and Anthony Albanese," he said. "And I'm certainly not at that level, so I think he's got a very good group of advisers around him, very senior group of advisers around him, and they're doing a fantastic job." But Senator Arbib was happy to offer advice on the merit of an early election. "I would actually be advising him [Kevin Rudd] not to go to an election," he said. "I think we've got a stimulus package that is going to roll out over the next 18 months, and there are projects underway now that need time to get moving."

But at least Rudd is loyal to mate who helped him to get the top job.

happy - as he should be, I entirely agree with that.
It'ld be unnatural to NOT help those who have helped you.

I disagree with the PM selecting his own ministry.
Far too much power, too isolating, there is no safety net there..

Quote:

Vibrant branches can help combat the abuse of power by a few. ACOMMITTEE established to investigate the Victorian ALP's preselection practices gravely reported that preselection ballots were being determined by the votes of "rounded-up coteries". It warned that, unless corrected, these practices would "enthrone mediocrity" in the party's political representatives. Alas, its recommendations for major reform of Labor's internal procedures were disregarded; instead, the party opted for minor changes to the system. No, this was not 2009, but 1924. The dysfunctions of the Victorian Labor Party that have received so much media attention over recent weeks have a lineage almost as old as the party itself. True, the names have changed and aspects of the modus operandi have altered — for example, whereas local party bosses once mobilised "members" on the basis of their religious affiliation, modern party warlords recruit from particular ethnic groupings. Yet much of what has been exposed — branch-stacking, manipulation by factional heavyweights, nepotism and sleaze — has periodically bedevilled the party since its infancy. Notably, as with the Ombudsman's findings about the ALP-dominated Brimbank Council, the party's practices have often been most lamentable in working-class districts where Labor's hold over local government has been virtually unassailable. There is no mystery here: where entrenched office guarantees fruits, the internal struggle for power is likely to be most intense and a culture of patronage thrives. Richmond exemplified this during much of the 20th century — its Labor-controlled council was notorious for its in-fighting and shady dealings..........

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/labor-must-give-members-a-voice-20090610-c3l5.html

The alp is comng apart at the seams, they are being assualted from all angles.

here is the alps' idea of equality.

The right has the maturity to realises not everyone is equal.



Quote:

IT'S hard not to be bedazzled by the zeros trailing around after Julia Gillard and the Rudd government on their grand tour of the nation's schools. It's Tuesday, it must be Melbourne, here's $3million. There's much to recommend the school building program envisaged by the government to create jobs and stimulate the economy. After all, what better investment in the country than its schools? But there is a major fault in the policy that undermines what, until now, had been clever politics by Gillard to defuse the toxic debate over the funding of public and private schools. It is apparent in the tale of two schools: Cranbrook in Sydney's eastern suburbs and Macquarie Fields Public School in the city's southwest. Cranbrook is a Sydney institution, a prestigious school attended by the sons of leading citizens, including James Packer. It was granted council approval last year to build a prep school of nine classrooms, a junior school of 12 classrooms, a library and IT centre, arts and music rooms, gymnasium, canteen and four tennis courts. The school grounds already include ovals, a modern gymnasium and an indoor heated swimming pool. Cranbrook students enjoy views over Sydney harbour. On Wednesday, Cranbrook received $3m for a multi-purpose hall. Macquarie Fields is home to a public housing estate, which came to national attention a few years ago after a riot between residents and police over four nights. It has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation. The local primary school, Macquarie Fields Public School, has more than 600 students, of whom half speak English as a second language. It, too, received $3m from the federal government: $2m to build classrooms and $1m to refurbish existing classrooms.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25623569-5013480,00.html

imagine if the right had done that.

How quickly has rudd lost his partys lead and his own image is sorely tarnished.
Undoubtly gillard is cackling and rubbing her bony hands in glee.
There have been a few flattering media articled on gillard lately.
Looks like they are clearing the way for the dumping of rudd.



Quote:

LABOR's long-held strong lead over the federal Coalition in opinion polls has collapsed, with the latest Newspoll showing the opposition just one percentage point short of the Government. While Kevin Rudd has maintained a strong lead over Malcolm Turnbull as preferred prime minister, the past fortnight has brought a four-point turnaround in primary voting intentions, with Labor now ahead by 41 per cent to the Coalition's 40 per cent, The Australian reports. The shift, which followed the resignation of former defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon, puts Labor at its lowest point since last October and well below its 2007 election primary result, when it won 43.3 per cent of the vote. The Coalition's primary vote is now at its highest point since the election, and two points higher than late last year when Mr Turnbull ousted Brendan Nelson to become opposition leader. However, the Newspoll, conducted exclusively for The Australian last weekend, shows Labor retaining a strong lead of 53 per cent to 47 per cent in two-party preferred terms. Mr Turnbull is free to go to the next federal election without speculation over his leadership after Peter Costello eliminated himself as a rival yesterday by announcing his retirement. It is understood Mr Turnbull will move quickly to consolidate his new strength by reshuffling his front bench in coming weeks to sharpen his bid for power.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25643304-953,00.html

ring ....... ring ........ ring ............. ring.

"hello"
"hello"
"I just gave you a lot of other peoples money"
"Yes, thanks"
"Could you send me an email saying what a terrific guy I am so everyone else knows ?"
"love to"
"Bye"
"cheerio"



Quote:

HOURS before Education Minister Julia Gillard rose in parliament to read a statement from a school in Kevin Rudd's electorate praising the government's school-building program, the Prime Minister's electorate office rang the principal asking him for the letter. The call followed a report in The Australian yesterday detailing criticisms of the implementation of the $14.7 billion school infrastructure program by the head of the P&C at Holland Park State School, Craig Mayne. Mr Mayne was in the office of the school principal, Anthony Gribbin, when the call came from one of Mr Rudd's electorate officers about 10.15am. "As I understand it, he said the Prime Minister was hopping mad about the article," Mr Mayne said yesterday. "The gist of the conversation was that there hadn't been enough consultation between the school and the P&C. It was a private conversation so I left the room soon after." Mr Rudd's office last night denied the comments attributed to the electorate officer, saying they were "entirely inaccurate and false". "At no stage did the electorate officer reflect on the views of the Prime Minister or in any way reflect on the level of consultation between the school leadership and the Parents and Citizens Association," a spokesman said. He said Mr Mayne and the school community liaison officer, a P&C position, had contacted Mr Rudd's electorate office yesterday, with the community liaison officer expressing concern on behalf of herself and Mr Gribbin that the report did not reflect the view of the school's leadership. The electorate officer then contacted the community liaison officer and Mr Gribbin, requesting "they put their concerns, expressed in the earlier phone call, in writing in the form of an email or letter". About 2.30pm, Ms Gillard rose in question time to read a response from Mr Gribbin that she described as "a pretty glowing endorsement". "Dear Kevin," the note from Mr Gribbin says. "The school community is delighted by its successful application for funding under the second round of the Primary Schools for the 21st Century in the Building the Education Revolution. "Holland Park State School will receive once-in-a-lifetime enhancement of its facilities with improvement of interactive technology for all students and teachers, a new library and a refurbished hall." Mr Gribbin refused to comment on Monday and was unavailable yesterday. .........

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25648327-601,00.html

Pity that they spend so much time and energy to fluff their feathers and subsequently try to hide it.

Oops, even the pinup leftard lesbian is being asked questions.






Quote:

Wong's silent treatment STEVE Fielding recently attended a climate change conference in Washington, DC. Listening to the papers presented, the Family First senator became puzzled that the scientific analyses they provided directly contradicted the reasons the Australian government had been giving as the justification for its emissions trading legislation. Fielding heard leading atmospheric physicist Dick Lindzen, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, describe evidence that the warming effect of carbon dioxide was much overestimated by computer climate models and remark: "What we see, then, is that the very foundation of the issue of global warming is wrong. "In a normal field, these results would pretty much wrap things up, but global warming-climate change has developed so much momentum that it has a life of its own quite removed from science." Another scientist, astrophysicist Willie Soon, from the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics, commented: "A magical CO2 knob for controlling weather and climate simply does not exist." Think about that for a moment with respect to our government's climate policy. On his return to Canberra Fielding asked Climate Change Minister Penny Wong to answer three simple questions about the relationship between human carbon dioxide emissions and alleged dangerous global warming. Fielding was seeking evidence, as opposed to unvalidated computer model projections, that human carbon dioxide emissions are driving dangerous global warming, to help him, and the public, assess whether cutting emissions would be a cost-effective environmental measure. After all, the cost to Australian taxpayers of the planned emissions trading bill is about $4000 a family a year for a carbon dioxide tax of $30 a tonne. The estimated benefit of such a large tax increase is that it may perhaps prevent an unmeasurable one-ten-thousandth of a degree of global warming from occurring. Next year? No, by 2100. The questions posed were: * Is it the case that CO2 increased by 5percent since 1998 while global temperature cooled during the same period? If so, why did the temperature not increase, and how can human emissions be to blame for dangerous levels of warming? * Is it the case that the rate and magnitude of warming between 1979 and 1998 (the late 20th-century phase of global warming) were not unusual as compared with warmings that have occurred earlier in the Earth's history? If the warming was not unusual, why is it perceived to have been caused by human CO2 emissions and, in any event, why is warming a problem if the Earth has experienced similar warmings in the past? * Is it the case that all computer models projected a steady increase in temperature for the period 1990 to 2008, whereas in fact there were only eight years of warming followed by 10years of stasis and cooling? If so, why is it assumed that long-term climate projections by the same models are suitable as a basis for public policy-making? As independent scientists attending the meeting, we found the minister's advisers unable, indeed in some part unwilling, to answer the questions..............

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25656849-5013480,00.html

Quote:

Posted by: Sprintcyclist After all, the cost to Australian taxpayers of the planned emissions trading bill is about $4000 a family a year for a carbon dioxide tax of $30 a tonne. The estimated benefit of such a large tax increase is that it may perhaps prevent an unmeasurable one-ten-thousandth of a degree of global warming from occurring. Next year? No, by 2100.

Possibly just TAX we have to have, that reluctantly has to be imposed, as government would otherwise not do it.

Fact that it might not be later on used to address issues it was supposed to is highly probable as not all “petrol excise” and not all car registration revenue is used to build roads.

To build roads we have private sector and their road tolls don’t we?

rudd's wasteful spending in the face of a recession HAS to be paid for one stage or another.
Often by higher interest rates.


Quote:

HIGHER interest rates and rising unemployment. "Increased economic pain" and "unpopular budget cuts". "Additional financial pressure on many families" and even "sacrifice". This is Kevin Rudd's grim new economic lexicon as he calls on Australia to "tighten our belts". The stunning rhetorical retreat to austerity has been forced by the reality that Labor has run out of rope - and money - in trying to protect working families from the global recession. Until now, the Prime Minister has urged middle Australia to spend patriotically to keep the recession at bay, showering them with $21 billion of borrowed budget cash. He's urged young couples to go into personal debt to break into the housing market, enticing them with budget subsidies and record low interest rates. The borrow-and-spend stimulus helped to break Australia's economic fall after the global financial crisis erupted last September. With the bonus of surprisingly strong export demand from China, Australia's recession won't be as deep as other developed economies. And, until now, many Australian household budgets have actually fared better during the crisis thanks to the cash handouts, lower petrol prices and big cuts in mortgage repayments. Business so far has avoided mass sackings. And consumer and business confidence bounced after a positive economic growth number for the March quarter suggested Australia would dodge recession. But now comes the catch. Partly because the budget and interest rate stimulus has been so front-loaded, Australia could be one of the few economies where the first half of 2009 will be stronger than the second half. The economy could still go backwards over the rest of the year before picking up next year. Lower contract prices for iron ore and coal exports have only starting hitting in the past few months. With no more cash handouts and unemployment trending higher, family incomes, and hence consumer spending, will be squeezed. Young homebuying couples could be exposed if one of them loses their job. And, as Rudd now explains, the Reserve Bank is likely to start lifting its ultra-low 3 per cent cash rate next year towards its more natural rate of 5-6 per cent. With Canberra removing the first-home buyers subsidy, that could prick the emerging bubble in lower-end housing prices, leaving some couples in a financial jam. And after urging them to be patriotically spendthrift, Rudd is now calling on working families to sacrifice in the national interest. The government insists the budget is in world's best shape. But after spending an estimated $77bn to stimulate the economy, the Prime Minister says the government must take "tough decisions" to wind back the budget deficit and deal with the fiscal "cost of intervention". Rudd will combine his bleak new message with insistence that the government's fiscal stimulus - such as the $14bn primary school construction program - will continue to support jobs. But he is warning working families to prepare for higher petrol prices and supermarket bills, on top of higher interest rates, when the economic recovery arrives and global commodity prices turn up. That's a bit rich. In opposition, Rudd promised to ease the household squeeze from higher petrol and food prices during a global commodity boom. But the actual policy response - including Fuel Watch and Grocery Watch - turned out to be a useless political stunt.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25839597-5017771,00.html

continually rudds unable to see the truth, just dolling out the tripe the leftards yearn to hear.


Quote:

.......Yet his latest essay turns on far more partisanship than any that John Howard and Peter Costello engaged in while the Coalition was in government between March 1996 and November 2007. On some occasions, at least, Howard and Costello acknowledged the important economic reforms initiated by the Labor governments led by Bob Hawke and Paul Keating. Howard and Costello did so partly to acknowledge reality, but also because, when in opposition, they had supported Labor’s economic reform agenda on such issues as floating the currency, financial deregulation, privatisation of government-owned industries, winding back protectionism and industrial relations reform. Rudd makes no such concessions about the Coalition’s achievements – partly because Labor opposed it on tax, industrial relations reform and formalising the independence of the Reserve Bank; and partly because Rudd is so politically tribal on policy. In his latest essay he does not mention Howard or Costello; and the achievements of Hawke and Keating receive only a fleeting reference. Rudd attributes the global financial crisis to "the consequence of a decade of neo-liberal free market fundamentalism". And he points the finger, without naming any names, at "the right", even though as recently as last year he said "we need a real debate that transcends the old battle lines of the left and right of Australian politics".............. ........The problem with Rudd’s partisanship is that it is capable of adversely affecting his long-term solutions to Australia’s economic problems. If right-of-centre politics is responsible for the GFC, then the British economy should be in a stronger position than Australia’s. It isn’t. But to acknowledge this Rudd would have to concede that the Howard government made some correct decisions on taxation and expenditure, industrial relations including waterfront reform and financial regulation and oversight............. .........But he does not explain how reregulating the labour market or introducing an emissions trading scheme before our competitors do so will improve our economic performance. Already there is concern about the effect of the scheme on the power industry in Victoria, South Australia and Queensland with long-term implications for employment. The Prime Minister’s essay tells us much about his economic thinking. It will serve as a benchmark to assess his policies in, say, five years. From here, Rudd is on his own. He believes he knows the causes of the GFC and that he has the solutions to Australia’s economic problems. It’s a big call........... ..

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/rudds-essay-shows-his-tribal-loyalty-20090727-dyn7.html?page=-1

this is what he did to the QLD govt.
it seized to a halt around him.

micromanaging means the manager checks EVERYTHING those below him do.
their spelling, punctuation, meeting times etc etc etc. EVERYTHING.
Noone can do a thing till the bos says they can.



Quote:

THE foreign affairs department is grinding to a halt as policy is run from the PM's office. PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd's obsession with policy micromanagement is creating a state of strategic paralysis inside the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. This is affecting DFAT's global operations but is particularly evident in its relationship with the Chinese government after the Chinalco issue and the arrest of Australian iron ore executive, Stern Hu. "This effectively means that things have ground to a policy halt in China," one foreign affairs source told The Australian yesterday. "Everything is sitting on the Prime Minister's desk and no one is prepared to second guess him." The issue has been made more complex because of Rudd's decision in the early days of his prime ministership to claim the high ground in Australia's policy relationship with China based on his previous diplomatic experience in that country and his ability to speak fluent Mandarin. Apparently believing that this put him in a unique relationship with the country's leadership, Rudd decided to use the opportunity of a lecture to Beijing University students last year to deliver a few home truths about China's policies on human rights in general and Tibet in particular. The DFAT sources say this was the beginning of a process in which Rudd has allowed himself to be wedged both politically and diplomatically on Australia-China policy. They say this is a result of a combination of Rudd's unfailing belief in his own diplomatic skills and his autocratic approach to policy making.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25843609-5015019,00.html

Now for 6 months there will be "hospital-fest".

There was good question from opposition, what he learned today that he did not know 18 months ago?

Why to play this game for another 6 months?

Quote:

MALCOLM Turnbull has ridiculed Kevin Rudd as a would-be philosopher-king foolishly and recklessly gambling public money while rewriting political history to accord with his own political fantasy world. And the Opposition Leader has warned it is inevitable that Australians will come to question the Prime Minister's massive spending on economic stimulus and ask themselves whether, despite Mr Rudd's "Orwellian" spin, they are getting value for money. The attack comes in Mr Turnbull's response to an essay of more than 6000 words written by Mr Rudd and published in full by the Fairfax newspapers. In a more streamlined 2000-word effort, published in The Weekend Australian today, Mr Turnbull savages Mr Rudd as a spin-driven rewriter of history with little intellectual consistency and a tendency to change his messages to suit whatever he believes people want to hear. "Kevin Rudd likes to style himself as a philosopher-king, issuing edicts from on high about how the world should be better governed," Mr Turnbull writes. "The fact is this Prime Minister is as poll-driven as any politician in living memory. He is forever adapting his message to suit the mood of the day. He changes with the seasons." Mr Turnbull writes that in 2007, when running for office, Mr Rudd styled himself as an "economic conservative" similar to the then prime minister, John Howard. But by late last year, he had assumed the guise of a democratic socialist, chastising Mr Howard as a neo-liberal extremist and proposing heavy government intervention to protect the economy. Mr Turnbull says Mr Rudd's claim that the Howard government promoted unrestrained greed and out-of-control capitalism is a falsehood by a man who casts himself as "the Great Helmsman" but who is unable to credit the previous government for leaving Australia better prepared for the recession than most other advanced economies. "Nor could he pay tribute to his own Labor predecessors for their role in creating a more open, flexible and resilient modern market economy," Mr Turnbull says. "Instead, in Mr Rudd's fantasy world, the last 25 years have been a bleak period of free-market extremism, where not just John Howard but Labor leaders Bob Hawke and Paul Keating are cast as willing cohorts in a vast global conspiracy to impose on an unsuspecting world an ideology of unrestrained greed." Mr Turnbull disputes Mr Rudd's claim that Australia is experiencing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. "In fact, Australia faced far worse economic conditions in the early 1990s when, under Labor, unemployment was over 10 per cent for more than two years. "Of course, Kevin Rudd's constant rhetoric of crisis had a point. It enabled him to justify extraordinary levels of borrowing and spending. All of that debt will have to be repaid." Mr Turnbull says Mr Rudd's only construction project has been to build a mountain of debt to leave to future generations and to burden future governments, robbing them of the capacity to drive their own reform agendas.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25865132-601,00.html

rudds broqadband has gone suspicoulsy quiet.
ie, it has done it's purpose, won some votes from leftards.
hopefully he lets it die without it costing us anymore money.



Quote:

Has there ever been a major Commonwealth program more hastily conceived than the national broadband network? After it was clear their previous $4.7 billion broadband plan was a dismal failure, it was reported Kevin Rudd and the Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy, dreamt up this $43 billion plan while on two flights between Sydney and Canberra in April. That’s not just policy on the run. That’s policy desperately sprinting from a horde of angry zombies while trying to pretend that the bite mark on its arm is nothing to worry about. This latest iteration of the great broadband plan is three months old and already behind schedule. The Tasmanian leg – supposed to be available to consumers from this month – has been pushed back until mid-2010. The project’s conception is still at an embarrassingly early stage. The Government’s financiers haven’t yet been consulted about exactly how the funds for the project will be raised, as a Senate committee heard last month. It’s veiled in secrecy. The Government has told the Opposition they’ll have to cough up $24,000 to see the documents which were supposed to have recommended the Government build the network. And, unsurprisingly for a project entirely developed by two career politicians in the brief time while the seatbelt sign was off, the broadband network’s business case is supremely flawed. The economist Henry Ergas has calculated it would have to cost individual subscribers at least $215 a month for the network to pay off its investment, and only if almost every broadband customer in Australia – 80 per cent – signs up. Furthermore, the Government is discovering to its surprise that it can’t untangle the telecommunications industry’s dense knot of competitive rivalries and regulatory quagmires just by waving around a giant novelty cheque. Yet to argue that the great broadband plan is perhaps just a tad undercooked is to invite accusations of Luddism. This seems to be because a lot of people view the broadband network as less an infrastructure project, and more the first tranche of broad social and economic revolution – the opening set-piece for the utopian-sounding "digital economy". So we’re repeatedly told it is a tragedy that Australia’s broadband take-up rates are somewhat lower than in other developed countries like Korea, because … well … think of all the cool things you can do online!...........

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/pmx2019s-national-broadband-plan-really-is-no-net-gain-20090802-e5re.html

Quote:

The wheels are spinning in mid air with the Rudd Labor Government clearly struggling to deliver its own election promises. A chronic incapacity to prioritise, coupled with a short attention span means that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has so far been incapable of getting most ideas past the committee or wish-list stage. Systemic failings in health and public hospitals have added pressure to Mr Rudd, who while pledging in 2007 that the buck stopped with him, planned a federal takeover of hospitals should they not improve by July 2009. This decision has been put off, with Australians now facing the likelihood of increased taxes to fund the public health system. The Rudd Government's plan for remote indigenous housing is a national disgrace, with not one house yet built and the Labor Northern Territory Aboriginal Affairs Minister threatening to quit the party because of federal Labor's mishandling of the $700 million scheme. The ``education revolution'' is in such shambles that the Auditor General is now investigating wasted government spending on the program. The National Broadband Network is a high priced sham. Broken promise after broken promise has thrown up nothing more than a revamp of an old proposal that has seen some marginal activity in - wait for it - Tasmania! Good luck to Tasmanians, but the NBN has bypassed mainland Australia! The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme - the ``highest moral issue of our time'' as Mr Rudd phrased it - has morphed into Labor's political wedge. Mr Rudd's announcement of 50,000 ``green jobs'' is a stunt. Rather than dealing with the loss of existing jobs and better aligning Australia's response to a global issue, the Prime Minister wants to press what he sees as a political advantage rather than working to get the scheme right. It seems that when dealing with the financial crisis, it's a ``global'' problem; but when it comes to climate change, Labor assumes a domestic response that does not yet know what the rest of the world will decide at Copenhagen is perfectly fine. Although Mr Rudd must be given credit for never overlooking the opportunity to make hay out of a crisis, even the government's handling of what passes in Australia for the ``global'' financial crisis is lining up a lot of economic chickens to come home to roost. The Government's macro-economic policy settings are very loose at the moment - the fiscal position is in deep deficit and interest rates are at generational lows. There is, however, a legitimate concern that if these policy settings are not wound back in a timely fashion, there is a risk of inflationary pressures emerging in the real economy. The Government should rein in stimulus spending because inflationary pressures will inevitably put upward pressure on interest rates, which will hurt all Australians with a mortgage. In addition to this, there is a real threat that if the massive levels of government borrowing continue as the recovery is underway, there will be a crowding-out effect in the capital markets. This will depend on what further borrowings are required to complete spending promised in the stimulus. We are concerned that a great deal of debt will be incurred to deliver the stimulus and that will push up interest rates further or potentially restrict the availability of credit to Australian businesses which will hamper their ability to invest and create jobs. The biggest impediment to Australia's economic recovery will be how to repair the Budget and repay Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan's massive debt. Every dollar spent today is borrowed money - a dollar that will have to be repaid in the future. Every dollar spent paying the interest bill and paying back debt is a dollar less to spend on health, education, and the other services Australians need. Imagine how much could have been achieved for Australia's future if the stimulus had been poured into the productive economy helping small business to grow or for serious and far-sighted reform of hospitals, instead of paying for holidays to Bali or equipping homes with a new plasma television. It is increasingly apparent that with an early recovery now in prospect, the Rudd Government has overreached with its massive stimulus. Australia injected more stimulus into its economy per capita than any other OECD country, excluding the US and South Korea, despite being in better shape than comparable countries at the start. An emerging consensus is that it is now time to rein-in the stimulus and withdraw the government interventions in the market that continue to have a distorting effect. The point is that Mr Rudd and Labor are still racking up debt at the same time there is no solution to the list of broken promises, abandoned projects and plans parked in the too-hard basket that are denying Australians critical reforms that will be essential for a prosperous future. For a man who stood up two years ago saying that the buck stopped with him, it's time it did and it's time that intelligent people, with the nation's broader interests at heart, call Mr Rudd to account for two years of fluff and spin with little to show for it. He wasn't elected to be a whirling dervish; he was elected to deliver on his promises and in the end must be judged by how capable he is... So far, not so good!

http://blogs.watoday.com.au/business/helencoonan/2009/08/01/mrruddswishli.html