http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/13800505/swan-lauds-another-upbeat-view-of-economy/

Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan has lauded an analysis of Australia's financial standing by one of the nation's major banks, saying it highlights the economy's "standout performance".

A report by Westpac found that Australia is in a much more robust financial position than the rest of the developed world, giving it a greater ability to weather the storms to come.

It also says that the strong fiscal position relative to the rest of the world means that Australia's financing will be very limited compared to nations of the north Atlantic, the Mediterranean and Japan.

"In an era of deteriorating credit quality, the formidable strength of Australian government securities should see them remain a very attractive investment proposition amongst global investors," Westpac economist Allot Clarke says.

"If, as we suspect, the European economy deteriorates further, then this will become all the more relevant."

Mr Swan said reports confirming Australia's standout performance are becoming a daily event.

"While there are parts of our patchwork economy facing pressures, our fundamentals remain strong, with our economy forecast to grow more strongly than every major advanced economy over the next two years," Mr Swan said.

Last week the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) gave Australia an upbeat appraisal, forecasting economic growth over the next two years to be ahead of the 34-member OECD bloc as a whole.

Government agency, the Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE), also found committed investment in the mining sector stood at a record $260.8 billion in April.

"Despite the Liberals' determination to talk our economy down at every turn and try to undermine confidence, the facts of our standout economic performance speak for themselves," Mr Swan said.

One of the favorite tricks of a bride is to choose really ugly bridesmaids so she can look good on the day

Looks like Swan is doing the same thing. To make himself look good he compares himself to cripples.

If you want to know how well we are doing - the current GDP is still way below what it was when Swan came in.

well I guess we look good until China feels the real pain of the melt down in Europe..

I would imagine the outpouring of cheap goods from China has already started to slow down.. which means their buying power will also slow down..

we are winging it on the mining industry   

you know the ones??the ones gillard is now wooing..


;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Maqqa wrote on May 28^th, 2012 at 6:25pm:

One of the favorite tricks of a bride is to choose really ugly bridesmaids so she can look good on the day Looks like Swan is doing the same thing. To make himself look good he compares himself to cripples. If you want to know how well we are doing - the current GDP is still way below what it was when Swan came in.

What are you talking about Maqqa, Real GDP growth has been positive since 2007. If you live in talkback world you might not think so, but our economy is still growing and growing fast enough to keep unemployment in check.

Maqqa wrote on May 28^th, 2012 at 6:25pm:

One of the favorite tricks of a bride is to choose really ugly bridesmaids so she can look good on the day Looks like Swan is doing the same thing. To make himself look good he compares himself to cripples. If you want to know how well we are doing - the current GDP is still way below what it was when Swan came in.

Quote:

more robust financial position than the rest of the developed world,

The rest of the developed world - all ugly bridesmaids accoding to Macca.


Quote:

Australia's financing will be very limited compared to nations of the north Atlantic, the Mediterranean and Japan.

Now there is some ugly bridesmaides.


Quote:

formidable strength of Australian government securities should see them remain a very attractive investment proposition amongst global investors,

All Global investors?


Quote:

If, as we suspect, the European economy deteriorates further

Quote:

(OECD) gave Australia an upbeat appraisal, forecasting economic growth over the next two years to be ahead of the 34-member OECD bloc as a whole.

This does not fit the bridesmaid example - this is clearly saying better than the best.

If you want to know how well we are doing - the current GDP is still way below what it was when Swan came in

This may not be the silliest comment you have made.

The rest of the developed world - lets see - is Spain, Greece, Ireland, Portugal

Its an attractive investment because are interest rates are higher than everyone else. The other countries had to lower their rates because they were infected by the bad loans

Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 9:55am:

The rest of the developed world - lets see - is Spain, Greece, Ireland, Portugal Its an attractive investment because are interest rates are higher than everyone else. The other countries had to lower their rates because they were infected by the bad loans

if we are doing SO WELL.. why is our govt in disarray??

they should be sitting on top of the world so to speak..

. I would really like to have an honest answer from a rusted on to be honest..

they keep telling us about these FIGURES.. and reminding us what a great treasurer we have..


so great he has never ONCE been nominated as a PM....huh!

at least Costello was always expected to take over..hahahaha..

it doesnt make logical sense to me

The Abbott camp appear to have ( ... quite sensibly) given up trying to bring down the Government's economic record

The main focus is, now, on the more "titillating, tabloid" tales of prostitutes, Craig Thomson - and the Pyne/Ashby ( ... so called) "SlipperGate" Affair







buzzanddidj wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:46pm:

AUSTRALIA - you're STILL "the TOP" ! May 23, 2012 The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) says the Australian economy is expected to grow at a faster rate than most other advanced economies in 2012 and 2013. It predicts that Australia's economy will grow at 3.1 per cent in 2012 and 3.7 per cent in 2013, and welcomes the Federal Government's commitment to delivering a budget surplus. But the organisation warns that the crisis in the eurozone poses the single largest risk to the global economy. The organisation has endorsed the Government's plan to boost its cash reserves while the economy is strong and demand for resource exports is still high, and says lowering interest rates will help offset any negative impact of budget tightening. In the budget handed down earlier this month, the Federal Government forecast growth of about 3.25 per cent slowing to 3 per cent. Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan says the report confirms yet again that Australia is the stand-out performer on the global stage. "It's consistent with the fact that we have got solid growth, long unemployment, contained inflation, strong public finances and a record pipeline of business investment in resources," he said. "I think it is good news. I mean, Australia has a triple-A credit rating from the three major credit rating agencies" Global implications The report warns that a failure to act immediately could lead to a worsening European crisis with serious global consequences. In November, the OECD warned if the eurozone did not tackle its debt crisis, there could be a deep recession with global implications. Six months on, the organisation says these immediate dangers have receded somewhat, but have not disappeared. The OECD predicts the eurozone's economy will shrink by 0.1 per cent this year. By contrast, the US economy will expand by 2.4 per cent. The OECD also expects eurozone unemployment to stay high, at 10.8 per cent this year. http://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/latest/a/-/article/13756178/oecd-issues-stark-eurozone-warning/ Aussies better off than ever May 02, 2012 MANY families may be struggling to make ends meet but a new report says we are much better off than in previous decades. The latest AMP.NATSEM Income and Wealth Report shows Australian household income is outpacing the cost of living over the longer term, with disposable incomes increasing 20 per cent over the last 27 years. It says the average family is better off by $224 per week in real terms. But the report points out that since 1984 the cost of living has skyrocketed with everyday essentials such as electricity (up 253 per cent), petrol (208 per cent) and public transport costs (287 per cent) all soaring. But those rises have been partially offset by dramatic drops in audio visual and computing, which now cost one tenth what they did in 1984, while average prices for clothing, footwear and major household appliances have changed little, and are often lower today than 27 years ago. AMP Financial Services managing director Craig Meller said the report shows households today are more focused on lifestyles and aspirations than they were in the 80s. "Many Australians are leading busier lives and facing greater demands on their time, which means we're now paying for things we may not have previously, such as childcare, gardening and housekeeping," Mr Meller said. "We've also seen a noticeable shift in spending habits with people spending more on education, holidays and eating out. "Essentially we seem to be leading bigger lifestyles, all of which can add to perceived cost of living pressures" The report says incomes have outpaced the cost of living across the board since 1984 and couples with children have seen their income grow by 37 per cent, single parent incomes have grown 34 per cent, and working families 22 per cent. Expenses for secondary students have grown by 264 per cent, mostly attributed to higher private school fees. Maintaining good health has not come cheap either - medical, dental and insurance costs have increased at even greater rates, jumping 560 per cent, 356 per cent and 346 per cent respectively. And if think petrol prices are outrageous, think again because we are amongst the lowest in the developed world. Only Canada, the United States and Mexico have cheaper petrol prices. Australia's average unleaded petrol price of around $1.40 per litre is significantly cheaper than most European countries where petrol can cost more than $2 per litre. Unsurprisingly, Sydney is the most expensive city in Australia, and Adelaide is the cheapest. http://www.news.com.au/business/aussies-better-off-than-ever/story-fn7mjon9-1226344212903#ixzz1vezS5AxT Not that you'd KNOW just how WELL we're faring - listening to all the depressing, ungrateful "what about me"  ( ... Hello Andrei !) DOOMSAYERS that haunt these such forums

i

Read the title of this thread buzz

When in doubt compare Aus to cripples

Full of brown floaties.

Kicking own goals and do not even know it.

As usual the story does the exact opposite to supporting either the title or the calim.

How would the Howard years compare to China Maqqa?
After all that's what you want to use as a benchmark now.
Haven't they had double digit growth for a decade or more?

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 10:28am:

How would the Howard years compare to China Maqqa? After all that's what you want to use as a benchmark now. Haven't they had double digit growth for a decade or more?

Compared to China? Are you kidding?

The Chinese economy cannot be compared to the Australian economy in terms of growth. This is the whole argument that China presented when it argued against Kyoto.

A developing economy grow at a different rate than a developed economy.

Developing economy can sustain double digit growth whereas a a country like Australia would soon crash if it grew at anywhere about 5%.

With a population of 1.3Billion - growth will continue in double digits for a long time. It's been growing this way for 20 years now and will continue for at least another 20

Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 10:35am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 10:28am: How would the Howard years compare to China Maqqa? After all that's what you want to use as a benchmark now. Haven't they had double digit growth for a decade or more? Compared to China? Are you kidding? The Chinese economy cannot be compared to the Australian economy in terms of growth. This is the whole argument that China presented when it argued against Kyoto. A developing economy grow at a different rate than a developed economy. Developing economy can sustain double digit growth whereas a a country like Australia would soon crash if it grew at anywhere about 5%. With a population of 1.3Billion - growth will continue in double digits for a long time. It's been growing this way for 20 years now and will continue for at least another 20

So we can't compare our economy to other developed nations because apparently now that their in the toilet it distorts the truth in your eyes.

We cant use emerging economies because then it would taint the Howard/Costello legacy.

So what do you wish to compare our economy too?

Scandinavian Countries, probably best to stay away from them as they have mining taxes + high individual tax rates(socialist bastards) & have done so for decades , yet Tony wishes to scrap ours.

Arabic Countries, Theocracies & Kingdoms that hand millions in oil wealth to every individual yearly.
Not really a fair comparison for a democracy.

So who?

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 10:51am:

So we can't compare our economy to other developed nations because apparently now that their in the toilet it distorts the truth in your eyes. We cant use emerging economies because then it would taint the Howard/Costello legacy. So what do you wish to compare our economy too? Scandinavian Countries, probably best to stay away from them as they have mining taxes + high individual tax rates(socialist bastards) & have done so for decades , yet Tony wishes to scrap ours. Arabic Countries, Theocracies & Kingdoms that hand millions in oil wealth to every individual yearly. Not really a fair comparison for a democracy. So who?

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Come on Maqqa, which economies should we be comparing ourselves to?

NBNMyths wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 10:56am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 10:51am: So we can't compare our economy to other developed nations because apparently now that their in the toilet it distorts the truth in your eyes. We cant use emerging economies because then it would taint the Howard/Costello legacy. So what do you wish to compare our economy too? Scandinavian Countries, probably best to stay away from them as they have mining taxes + high individual tax rates(socialist bastards) & have done so for decades , yet Tony wishes to scrap ours. Arabic Countries, Theocracies & Kingdoms that hand millions in oil wealth to every individual yearly. Not really a fair comparison for a democracy. So who? Couldn't have said it better myself. Come on Maqqa, which economies should we be comparing ourselves to?

A world economy is only as strong as its weakest part.

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 10:51am:

Maqqa wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 10:35am: Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 10:28am: How would the Howard years compare to China Maqqa? After all that's what you want to use as a benchmark now. Haven't they had double digit growth for a decade or more? Compared to China? Are you kidding? The Chinese economy cannot be compared to the Australian economy in terms of growth. This is the whole argument that China presented when it argued against Kyoto. A developing economy grow at a different rate than a developed economy. Developing economy can sustain double digit growth whereas a a country like Australia would soon crash if it grew at anywhere about 5%. With a population of 1.3Billion - growth will continue in double digits for a long time. It's been growing this way for 20 years now and will continue for at least another 20 So we can't compare our economy to other developed nations because apparently now that their in the toilet it distorts the truth in your eyes. It's not about "in my eyes". Its the truth and it is a distortion because our banks were never caught up in the triggers that set of the GFC. We only experienced the ripple effect. We cant use emerging economies because then it would taint the Howard/Costello legacy. Then you don't understand basic economic theories. Neither did Swan for that matter when Turnbull mentioned about the "two-speed economy" and he didn't know what it meant. There are huge differences between an emerging economy and an established economy. If you don't know - then admit it and I'll explain it to you. So what do you wish to compare our economy too? Lets compare it to economies unaffected by the triggers of the GFC. Or compare it by GDP. Or compare economic indicators from one government to the next. Debt, surpluses, interest rates, unemployment, CPI. Lets have a look at the bigger picture rather than allowing Swan to deceive you by focusing on one or two factors Scandinavian Countries, probably best to stay away from them as they have mining taxes + high individual tax rates(socialist bastards) & have done so for decades , yet Tony wishes to scrap ours. Their economy and social systems is different to ours. There demography and geography is also different than ours which changes the policies you implement. case in point was when Rudd compared Singapore's implemented broadband technology against Aust's broadband technology. The land size of Singapore is the difference ie geography. Arabic Countries, Theocracies & Kingdoms that hand millions in oil wealth to every individual yearly. Not really a fair comparison for a democracy. Our democracy was originally based on Christian values which evolved into the system it is now. These Arab countries have based their system on Sharia law and/or Islamic belief. Can't compare! Even if you do comapre - need to compare at least GDP/capita so see how individuals are doing against the country as a whole So who?

Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 9:55am:

The rest of the developed world - lets see - is Spain, Greece, Ireland, Portugal

You seem to have forgotten ...


The United States of America

http://www.tommyduggan.com/images/flag%20torn%20071006%20089.jpg


The United Kingdom

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2722/4428099426_e5a5513dfd_z.jpg


Japan

http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/cienpies/cienpies1104/cienpies110400012/9262877-japan-flag-torn-and-bleeding-for-disaster.jpg


Canada

http://activerain.com/image_store/uploads/8/6/9/7/7/ar130758092477968.JPG


Germany

http://media.cleveland.com/business_impact/photo/germany-opel-gm-7dbc1e56634bc441_large.jpg


France

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4029/4688031955_86325681d5_z.jpg


... and the REST of the EURO

http://ak1.picdn.net/shutterstock/videos/1187950/preview/stock-footage-metaphor-about-the-dispute-in-the-euro-zone.jpg



i





http://www.australian-flag.org/australian-flag-640.jpg

http://www.anbg.gov.au/images/flags/aboriginal.gif

http://www.goseeaustralia.com.au/article_pics/The_Eureka_flag%20_Courtesy_Eureka_Centre_Ballarat.jpg

I have already posted the comparison for the rest of the world buzz so your example is moot as per usual

Just in case you wonder here it is again

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/


If Swan wants to go on growth numbers alone then Mongolia, Rwanda and Bangladesh are doing better than Australia

Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 11:52am:

I have already posted the comparison for the rest of the world

And AGAIN ...





You seem to have CONVENIENLY forgotten ...


The United States of America

http://www.tommyduggan.com/images/flag%20torn%20071006%20089.jpg


The United Kingdom

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2722/4428099426_e5a5513dfd_z.jpg


Japan

http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/cienpies/cienpies1104/cienpies110400012/9262877-japan-flag-torn-and-bleeding-for-disaster.jpg


Canada

http://activerain.com/image_store/uploads/8/6/9/7/7/ar130758092477968.JPG


Germany

http://media.cleveland.com/business_impact/photo/germany-opel-gm-7dbc1e56634bc441_large.jpg


France

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4029/4688031955_86325681d5_z.jpg


... and the REST of the EURO

http://ak1.picdn.net/shutterstock/videos/1187950/preview/stock-footage-metaphor-about-the-dispute-in-the-euro-zone.jpg








Just FACE it ...

Australia is the LEADER and the ROLE MODEL that economies - WORLD-WIDE - aspire to





http://www.australian-flag.org/australian-flag-640.jpg

http://www.anbg.gov.au/images/flags/aboriginal.gif

http://www.goseeaustralia.com.au/article_pics/The_Eureka_flag%20_Courtesy_Eureka_Centre_Ballarat.jpg

Not forgotten, Buzz.

Ignored.

Because the facts don't suit the Coalition's agenda.

Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 11:02am:

It's not about "in my eyes". Its the truth and it is a distortion because our banks were never caught up in the triggers that set of the GFC. We only experienced the ripple effect.

And yet our banks continue to bemoan the cost of money.
Are you saying they are lying?
It's true thanks to Costello & APRA they were not exposed to as much junk stock but the cost of lending is global so they were and still are exposed to those forces.


Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 11:02am:

Then you don't understand basic economic theories. Neither did Swan for that matter when Turnbull mentioned about the "two-speed economy" and he didn't know what it meant. There are huge differences between an emerging economy and an established economy. If you don't know - then admit it and I'll explain it to you.

Yet you claim we cannot compare established with established.
When we(well Swan) compares our economy to UK/USA, you have said we should look to economies like China/India.
So when I say then we should use those economies to re-acess the past performance of your favoured party  suddenly we cant.


Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 11:02am:

Lets compare it to economies unaffected by the triggers of the GFC. Or compare it by GDP. Or compare economic indicators from one government to the next. Debt, surpluses, interest rates, unemployment, CPI. Lets have a look at the bigger picture rather than allowing Swan to deceive you by focusing on one or two factors

You just cannot cut out the GFC as you would like, I agree with your acessment of only periferial damage to us  but we are still effected.
You cannot compare key economic indicators from good times to indictors of bad or recovering.
Apples & oranges my friend.


Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 11:02am:

Their economy and social systems is different to ours. There demography and geography is also different than ours which changes the policies you implement. case in point was when Rudd compared Singapore's implemented broadband technology against Aust's broadband technology. The land size of Singapore is the difference ie geography.

On this we find common ground


Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 11:02am:

Our democracy was originally based on Christian values which evolved into the system it is now. These Arab countries have based their system on Sharia law and/or Islamic belief. Can't compare! Even if you do comapre - need to compare at least GDP/capita so see how individuals are doing against the country as a whole

There's that ground again :)

MOTR wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 4:23am:

Maqqa wrote on May 28th, 2012 at 6:25pm: One of the favorite tricks of a bride is to choose really ugly bridesmaids so she can look good on the day Looks like Swan is doing the same thing. To make himself look good he compares himself to cripples. If you want to know how well we are doing - the current GDP is still way below what it was when Swan came in. What are you talking about Maqqa, Real GDP growth has been positive since 2007. If you live in talkback world you might not think so, but our economy is still growing and growing fast enough to keep unemployment in check.

actually there was one quarter of negative growth and you write it as if there was endless recession prior to labors belevolent reign. actually it was 12 years of recession free boom times. THAT is the point. BOOM times.

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 4:38pm:

Maqqa wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 11:02am: Lets compare it to economies unaffected by the triggers of the GFC. Or compare it by GDP. Or compare economic indicators from one government to the next. Debt, surpluses, interest rates, unemployment, CPI. Lets have a look at the bigger picture rather than allowing Swan to deceive you by focusing on one or two factors You just cannot cut out the GFC as you would like, I agree with your acessment of only periferial damage to us  but we are still effected. You cannot compare key economic indicators from good times to indictors of bad or recovering. Apples & oranges my friend.

FFS dsmithy

I'll explain the GFC to you again.

It started out as US banks re-selling their mortgages books to other banks.

The banks that purchased the mortgages in turn sells it to other banks both in the US and overseas and so on and so on.

It got to a point when the loans are called and they found there was not enough liquidity and/or collateral to cover the loans

Hence the write offs of bank assets. Which triggers the GFC - Global Financial Crisis. Its a name given the the fall out of the events I have described.

Therefore I am not cutting out the GFC. I am stating the GFC

If you say - we can not compare key indicator from each of the times then why are you accepting Swan's comparison?

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 4:38pm:

Maqqa wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 11:02am: It's not about "in my eyes". Its the truth and it is a distortion because our banks were never caught up in the triggers that set of the GFC. We only experienced the ripple effect. And yet our banks continue to bemoan the cost of money. Are you saying they are lying? It's true thanks to Costello & APRA they were not exposed to as much junk stock but the cost of lending is global so they were and still are exposed to those forces.

Because the funds are coming from overseas banks and not the Aust government

Overseas banks hold Aust cash, so do fund managers and they demand a certain return for their money. It's got nothing to to with APRA

Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 6:53pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 4:38pm: Maqqa wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 11:02am: Lets compare it to economies unaffected by the triggers of the GFC. Or compare it by GDP. Or compare economic indicators from one government to the next. Debt, surpluses, interest rates, unemployment, CPI. Lets have a look at the bigger picture rather than allowing Swan to deceive you by focusing on one or two factors You just cannot cut out the GFC as you would like, I agree with your acessment of only periferial damage to us  but we are still effected. You cannot compare key economic indicators from good times to indictors of bad or recovering. Apples & oranges my friend. FFS dsmithy I'll explain the GFC to you again. It started out as US banks re-selling their mortgages books to other banks. The banks that purchased the mortgages in turn sells it to other banks both in the US and overseas and so on and so on. It got to a point when the loans are called and they found there was not enough liquidity and/or collateral to cover the loans Hence the write offs of bank assets. Which triggers the GFC - Global Financial Crisis. Its a name given the the fall out of the events I have described. Therefore I am not cutting out the GFC. I am stating the GFC If you say - we can not compare key indicator from each of the times then why are you accepting Swan's comparison?

Thanks for that but I do know the reasons for the GFC.

Swan is at least comparing current figures with traditional comparative economies, which you now assert is misleading.

Whatever why you want to cut it our economy is strong.
2 speed yes but if it was a liberal government you would be claiming the current indicators were the result of strong economic management.

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

Maqqa wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 6:53pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 4:38pm: Maqqa wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 11:02am: Lets compare it to economies unaffected by the triggers of the GFC. Or compare it by GDP. Or compare economic indicators from one government to the next. Debt, surpluses, interest rates, unemployment, CPI. Lets have a look at the bigger picture rather than allowing Swan to deceive you by focusing on one or two factors You just cannot cut out the GFC as you would like, I agree with your acessment of only periferial damage to us  but we are still effected. You cannot compare key economic indicators from good times to indictors of bad or recovering. Apples & oranges my friend. FFS dsmithy I'll explain the GFC to you again. It started out as US banks re-selling their mortgages books to other banks. The banks that purchased the mortgages in turn sells it to other banks both in the US and overseas and so on and so on. It got to a point when the loans are called and they found there was not enough liquidity and/or collateral to cover the loans Hence the write offs of bank assets. Which triggers the GFC - Global Financial Crisis. Its a name given the the fall out of the events I have described. Therefore I am not cutting out the GFC. I am stating the GFC If you say - we can not compare key indicator from each of the times then why are you accepting Swan's comparison? Thanks for that but I do know the reasons for the GFC. Swan is at least comparing current figures with traditional comparative economies, which you now assert is misleading. Whatever why you want to cut it our economy is strong. 2 speed yes but if it was a liberal government you would be claiming the current indicators were the result of strong economic management.

But some of these economies are impacted directly from the GFC (US, UK) and some aren't (Aust)

There are some that are further impact by their own government mismanagement eg Greece and Ireland

So lets compare economies that are indirectly impacted

Rwanda v Australia - Rwanda grew faster than Australia therefore Swan is worse than Rwanda?

Of course not. This is why I said we also need to include key economic indicators as well as taking into account the impact of the GFC.

Swan simply pick and choose the economies that makes him look good despite knowing that these are apples, pears and oranges

Maqqa wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 7:18pm:

Swan simply pick and choose the economies that makes him look good despite knowing that these are apples, pears and oranges

Swan can do what he wants.
I'm basing my opinion on the fact that according to the ABS unemployment is low, inflation is well within the RBA's 2 to 3%pa and interest rates are low.
As I said indictors you would be spruking as good economic management if a Liberal government.

longweekend58 wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 5:28pm:

MOTR wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 4:23am: Maqqa wrote on May 28th, 2012 at 6:25pm: One of the favorite tricks of a bride is to choose really ugly bridesmaids so she can look good on the day Looks like Swan is doing the same thing. To make himself look good he compares himself to cripples. If you want to know how well we are doing - the current GDP is still way below what it was when Swan came in. What are you talking about Maqqa, Real GDP growth has been positive since 2007. If you live in talkback world you might not think so, but our economy is still growing and growing fast enough to keep unemployment in check. actually there was one quarter of negative growth and you write it as if there was endless recession prior to labors belevolent reign. actually it was 12 years of recession free boom times. THAT is the point. BOOM times.

I didn't say anything of the kind, Longy. All I said is that we have had positive growth since 2007. If you want to point to one quarter of negative growth in the midst of the worst global recession in 75 years, go ahead. The fact is that year on year we have enjoyed economic growth for the last five years. Maqqa's claim that the economy is smaller today than in 2007 is absolute bollocks. Unfortunately, Maqqa's economic illiteracy probably reflects a fair chunk of the talk back audience.

MOTR wrote on May 29^th, 2012 at 9:04pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 5:28pm: MOTR wrote on May 29th, 2012 at 4:23am: Maqqa wrote on May 28th, 2012 at 6:25pm: One of the favorite tricks of a bride is to choose really ugly bridesmaids so she can look good on the day Looks like Swan is doing the same thing. To make himself look good he compares himself to cripples. If you want to know how well we are doing - the current GDP is still way below what it was when Swan came in. What are you talking about Maqqa, Real GDP growth has been positive since 2007. If you live in talkback world you might not think so, but our economy is still growing and growing fast enough to keep unemployment in check. actually there was one quarter of negative growth and you write it as if there was endless recession prior to labors belevolent reign. actually it was 12 years of recession free boom times. THAT is the point. BOOM times. I didn't say anything of the kind, Longy. All I said is that we have had positive growth since 2007. If you want to point to one quarter of negative growth in the midst of the worst global recession in 75 years, go ahead. The fact is that year on year we have enjoyed economic growth for the last five years. Maqqa's claim that the economy is smaller today than in 2007 is absolute bollocks. Unfortunately, Maqqa's economic illiteracy probably reflects a fair chunk of the talk back audience.

http://www.google.com.au/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:AUS&dl=en&hl=en&q=australian+gdp+statistics

Here's a heads up about the GDP measures.

The Australia $ was higher than the USD in the last 12-18 months and GDP is measured in USD

http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/fs/aust.pdf

watch for the currency conversion

You can measure the GDP of a country in any currency you like, Maqqa. Here's a heads up, we're Australian we tend to measure our national accounts, including GDP, in AUD. Only an idiot would argue that the Australian economy today is smaller than what it was in 2007.

Recent economic indicators:
                                                 2006         2007            2008           2009            2010(a)               2011(b)
GDP (US$bn) (current prices):     785.8        954.5           1,060.7       987.1           1,238.0                1,507.4
GDP PPP (US$bn) (c):                 736.1        792.1           830.6          850.9           883.8                   919.0
GDP per capita (US$):                37,644       44,891         48,813        44,602         55,150                 66,984
GDP per capita PPP (US$) (c):     35,267       37,253         38,224        38,763         39,764                 40,836
Real GDP growth (% change yoy):2.5            4.7               2.4             1.5               2.5                      1.8
Current account balance (US$m):-41,503    -59,214        -47,442       -42,031       -33,027                -32,801
Current account balance (% GDP):-5.3         -6.2             -4.5             -4.3              -2.7                     -2.2
Goods & services exports (% GDP):20.0        19.1            22.3            20.0              21.2                     21.1
Inflation (% change yoy):              3.3           3.0             3.7               2.1              2.7                       3.5

Seeing everything that should go up has & everything that should come down also has travelled in the right direction, a .7% slowing probably was on the cards, I'm assuming you wish us to only focus on that line.
The top line is the most telling our GDP has all but doubled since we booted Howard out.

MOTR wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 1:15am:

You can measure the GDP of a country in any currency you like, Maqqa. Here's a heads up, we're Australian we tend to measure our national accounts, including GDP, in AUD. Only an idiot would argue that the Australian economy today is smaller than what it was in 2007.

So show me the AUD equivalent!

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 10:01am:

Recent economic indicators:                                                  2006         2007            2008           2009            2010(a)               2011(b) GDP (US$bn) (current prices):     785.8        954.5           1,060.7       987.1           1,238.0                1,507.4 GDP PPP (US$bn) (c):                 736.1        792.1           830.6          850.9           883.8                   919.0 GDP per capita (US$):                37,644       44,891         48,813        44,602         55,150                 66,984 GDP per capita PPP (US$) (c):     35,267       37,253         38,224        38,763         39,764                 40,836 Real GDP growth (% change yoy):2.5            4.7               2.4             1.5               2.5                      1.8 Current account balance (US$m):-41,503    -59,214        -47,442       -42,031       -33,027                -32,801 Current account balance (% GDP):-5.3         -6.2             -4.5             -4.3              -2.7                     -2.2 Goods & services exports (% GDP):20.0        19.1            22.3            20.0              21.2                     21.1 Inflation (% change yoy):              3.3           3.0             3.7               2.1              2.7                       3.5 Seeing everything that should go up has & everything that should come down also has travelled in the right direction, a .7% slowing probably was on the cards, I'm assuming you wish us to only focus on that line. The top line is the most telling our GDP has all but doubled since we booted Howard out.

Look at the numbers again and in reference to the exchange rates

Maqqa wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 10:04am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:01am: Recent economic indicators:                                                  2006         2007            2008           2009            2010(a)               2011(b) GDP (US$bn) (current prices):     785.8        954.5           1,060.7       987.1           1,238.0                1,507.4 GDP PPP (US$bn) (c):                 736.1        792.1           830.6          850.9           883.8                   919.0 GDP per capita (US$):                37,644       44,891         48,813        44,602         55,150                 66,984 GDP per capita PPP (US$) (c):     35,267       37,253         38,224        38,763         39,764                 40,836 Real GDP growth (% change yoy):2.5            4.7               2.4             1.5               2.5                      1.8 Current account balance (US$m):-41,503    -59,214        -47,442       -42,031       -33,027                -32,801 Current account balance (% GDP):-5.3         -6.2             -4.5             -4.3              -2.7                     -2.2 Goods & services exports (% GDP):20.0        19.1            22.3            20.0              21.2                     21.1 Inflation (% change yoy):              3.3           3.0             3.7               2.1              2.7                       3.5 Seeing everything that should go up has & everything that should come down also has travelled in the right direction, a .7% slowing probably was on the cards, I'm assuming you wish us to only focus on that line. The top line is the most telling our GDP has all but doubled since we booted Howard out. Look at the numbers again and in reference to the exchange rates

So now you wish to blame exchange rates, geez we really must have been in the sh!tter during Howard's tenure when the AUD hit its all time low of .4775 & hovered around its historical average of .75.
Stop digging mate ;)

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 10:22am:

Maqqa wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:04am: Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:01am: Recent economic indicators:                                                  2006         2007            2008           2009            2010(a)               2011(b) GDP (US$bn) (current prices):     785.8        954.5           1,060.7       987.1           1,238.0                1,507.4 GDP PPP (US$bn) (c):                 736.1        792.1           830.6          850.9           883.8                   919.0 GDP per capita (US$):                37,644       44,891         48,813        44,602         55,150                 66,984 GDP per capita PPP (US$) (c):     35,267       37,253         38,224        38,763         39,764                 40,836 Real GDP growth (% change yoy):2.5            4.7               2.4             1.5               2.5                      1.8 Current account balance (US$m):-41,503    -59,214        -47,442       -42,031       -33,027                -32,801 Current account balance (% GDP):-5.3         -6.2             -4.5             -4.3              -2.7                     -2.2 Goods & services exports (% GDP):20.0        19.1            22.3            20.0              21.2                     21.1 Inflation (% change yoy):              3.3           3.0             3.7               2.1              2.7                       3.5 Seeing everything that should go up has & everything that should come down also has travelled in the right direction, a .7% slowing probably was on the cards, I'm assuming you wish us to only focus on that line. The top line is the most telling our GDP has all but doubled since we booted Howard out. Look at the numbers again and in reference to the exchange rates So now you wish to blame exchange rates, geez we really must have been in the sh!tter during Howard's tenure when the AUD hit its all time low of .4775 & hovered around its historical average of .75. Stop digging mate ;)

Where did I blame the exchange rate for how bad the economy is going?

I am simply pointing out that at the time of measuring you need to take into account all factors.

As for the 0.45 - are we measuring it in accordance to that time or are wee looking at the economy in 2007 and comparing it to the economy of last 12 months?

Maqqa wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 10:25am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:22am: Maqqa wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:04am: Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:01am: Recent economic indicators:                                                  2006         2007            2008           2009            2010(a)               2011(b) GDP (US$bn) (current prices):     785.8        954.5           1,060.7       987.1           1,238.0                1,507.4 GDP PPP (US$bn) (c):                 736.1        792.1           830.6          850.9           883.8                   919.0 GDP per capita (US$):                37,644       44,891         48,813        44,602         55,150                 66,984 GDP per capita PPP (US$) (c):     35,267       37,253         38,224        38,763         39,764                 40,836 Real GDP growth (% change yoy):2.5            4.7               2.4             1.5               2.5                      1.8 Current account balance (US$m):-41,503    -59,214        -47,442       -42,031       -33,027                -32,801 Current account balance (% GDP):-5.3         -6.2             -4.5             -4.3              -2.7                     -2.2 Goods & services exports (% GDP):20.0        19.1            22.3            20.0              21.2                     21.1 Inflation (% change yoy):              3.3           3.0             3.7               2.1              2.7                       3.5 Seeing everything that should go up has & everything that should come down also has travelled in the right direction, a .7% slowing probably was on the cards, I'm assuming you wish us to only focus on that line. The top line is the most telling our GDP has all but doubled since we booted Howard out. Look at the numbers again and in reference to the exchange rates So now you wish to blame exchange rates, geez we really must have been in the sh!tter during Howard's tenure when the AUD hit its all time low of .4775 & hovered around its historical average of .75. Stop digging mate ;) Where did I blame the exchange rate for how bad the economy is going? I am simply pointing out that at the time of measuring you need to take into account all factors. As for the 0.45 - are we measuring it in accordance to that time or are wee looking at the economy in 2007 and comparing it to the economy of last 12 months?

Find me one independent qualified person who thinks economy is going bad.
Accountant
Economist
Lecturer
hell even financial reporter

Just one to back your claim of a bad economy.

The only idiots who say that are Abbott,Hockey & their lackey's.
Are you a lackey?

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 10:35am:

Maqqa wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:25am: Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:22am: Maqqa wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:04am: Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 10:01am: Recent economic indicators:                                                  2006         2007            2008           2009            2010(a)               2011(b) GDP (US$bn) (current prices):     785.8        954.5           1,060.7       987.1           1,238.0                1,507.4 GDP PPP (US$bn) (c):                 736.1        792.1           830.6          850.9           883.8                   919.0 GDP per capita (US$):                37,644       44,891         48,813        44,602         55,150                 66,984 GDP per capita PPP (US$) (c):     35,267       37,253         38,224        38,763         39,764                 40,836 Real GDP growth (% change yoy):2.5            4.7               2.4             1.5               2.5                      1.8 Current account balance (US$m):-41,503    -59,214        -47,442       -42,031       -33,027                -32,801 Current account balance (% GDP):-5.3         -6.2             -4.5             -4.3              -2.7                     -2.2 Goods & services exports (% GDP):20.0        19.1            22.3            20.0              21.2                     21.1 Inflation (% change yoy):              3.3           3.0             3.7               2.1              2.7                       3.5 Seeing everything that should go up has & everything that should come down also has travelled in the right direction, a .7% slowing probably was on the cards, I'm assuming you wish us to only focus on that line. The top line is the most telling our GDP has all but doubled since we booted Howard out. Look at the numbers again and in reference to the exchange rates So now you wish to blame exchange rates, geez we really must have been in the sh!tter during Howard's tenure when the AUD hit its all time low of .4775 & hovered around its historical average of .75. Stop digging mate ;) Where did I blame the exchange rate for how bad the economy is going? I am simply pointing out that at the time of measuring you need to take into account all factors. As for the 0.45 - are we measuring it in accordance to that time or are wee looking at the economy in 2007 and comparing it to the economy of last 12 months? Find me one independent qualified person who thinks economy is going bad. Accountant Economist Lecturer hell even financial reporter Just one to back your claim of a bad economy. The only idiots who say that are Abbott,Hockey & their lackey's. Are you a lackey?

In what context?

We were discussing the GDP - which is only one of the many indicators

Maqqa wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 11:02am:

We were discussing the GDP - which is only one of the many indicators

We've discussed quite a few things throughout the thread.
Unfortunately for you, no matter how you spin it Australia's economy is strong & only getting stronger.
You have almost a bottomless pit of things to kick Labor with(most they deserve) but the economy is not one.

Dsmithy70 wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 11:21am:

Maqqa wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 11:02am: We were discussing the GDP - which is only one of the many indicators We've discussed quite a few things throughout the thread. Unfortunately for you, no matter how you spin it Australia's economy is strong & only getting stronger. You have almost a bottomless pit of things to kick Labor with(most they deserve) but the economy is not one.

Actually I posted the links to these figures in response to accusations about GDP

Maqqa wrote on May 30^th, 2012 at 10:02am:

MOTR wrote on May 30th, 2012 at 1:15am: You can measure the GDP of a country in any currency you like, Maqqa. Here's a heads up, we're Australian we tend to measure our national accounts, including GDP, in AUD. Only an idiot would argue that the Australian economy today is smaller than what it was in 2007. So show me the AUD equivalent!

Maqqa, I don't need to. Our national accounts are measured in AUD, just check the ABS. Since 2007 we have not experienced a single year of negative year on year economic growth. Think about it, Maqqa, if something is growing for 4/5 consecutive years how can it be smaller. Further, if the economy had been stagnating, or as you implied shrinking, since 2007, we'd know about it. Our unemployment rate would be well past double figures for a start.