All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY.
Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE!



perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 7:15pm:

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 7:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:16pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:54pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie the facts don't support that however.. but you never let that get in the way, do you?  But ironically here you are doing EXACLTY what you deride Hockey for doing. idiot. In fact, the Howard Libs left a Gross Debt of about $60 Billion and their NET Debt was actually a Credit of about $45 Billion, when they left office. The current Gross Debt is about $260 Billion & Net Debt is about $144 Billion. And, before those on both sides start their SPIN, it should be noted that - 1) The Howard years (1996-2007) were Peak Global Economic years , due to the Baby Boomer Boom. Whilst these were Peak Economic years, credit should go to the Libs, as they clearly out performed most other Politicians from around the world, who did little to nothing to take advantage of the Boom times. That said, quite a bit of the Libs Debt pay-down of Debt did come from asset sales AND they sold a whole bundle of gold at around $250 a ton, which is now worth around $1,400 a ton. 2) The Labor years (2007-2013) have seen the GFC commence, which is 2nd only to the great Depression & it is certainly far from over. Whilst Labor has had a torrid Global Economy, they haven't gone overboard with increasing Debt, as did many other countries, BUT they certainly did create a few sizable errors (cock-ups), along the way! It is appropriate that, Politicians from both major party's should be forced to use factually correct information! Perhaps, IF they fail to do so, THEN THEY COULD BE SENT TO THE "NAUGHTY CHAIR" FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT?

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 8:04pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:53pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:16pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:54pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie the facts don't support that however.. but you never let that get in the way, do you?  But ironically here you are doing EXACLTY what you deride Hockey for doing. idiot. In fact, the Howard Libs left a Gross Debt of about $60 Billion and their NET Debt was actually a Credit of about $45 Billion, when they left office. The current Gross Debt is about $260 Billion & Net Debt is about $144 Billion. And, before those on both sides start their SPIN, it should be noted that - 1) The Howard years (1996-2007) were Peak Global Economic years , due to the Baby Boomer Boom. Whilst these were Peak Economic years, credit should go to the Libs, as they clearly out performed most other Politicians from around the world, who did little to nothing to take advantage of the Boom times. That said, quite a bit of the Libs Debt pay-down of Debt did come from asset sales AND they sold a whole bundle of gold at around $250 a ton, which is now worth around $1,400 a ton. 2) The Labor years (2007-2013) have seen the GFC commence, which is 2nd only to the great Depression & it is certainly far from over. Whilst Labor has had a torrid Global Economy, they haven't gone overboard with increasing Debt, as did many other countries, BUT they certainly did create a few sizable errors (cock-ups), along the way! It is appropriate that, Politicians from both major party's should be forced to use factually correct information! Perhaps, IF they fail to do so, THEN THEY COULD BE SENT TO THE "NAUGHTY CHAIR" FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT? [/b] it should be noted that he $144B net debt is a figure from a year ago and is likely top be notably higher.  After all, those deficits don't fund themselves. Anyhow, using these net figures the picture is an embarrassment of epic proportions.  $45B in the bank in cash and a mere 6 years later we are $200B+ worse off.  It is hard to look at that as anything other than an epic fail. That is correct, the $144 Billion figure was the last official figure that I recall, from 30/06/2012. That would be incorrect! When viewed with the relevant Economic times & the absolute disasters incurred by most other countries, Australia has held up reasonably well, thanks both to the Libs & Labor, although both could have & should have, done better!

Oh yes & as corrected by Phil, Gold was actually $250 per ounce, not per Ton!

Maqqa wrote on Jul 6^th, 2013 at 2:23pm:

I note all the austerity talk from lefties as if it's a bad thing Facts are Austerity simply means spending less because the previous government had wasted sooooo much money

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 6^th, 2013 at 3:02pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 2:23pm: I note all the austerity talk from lefties as if it's a bad thing Facts are Austerity simply means spending less because the previous government had wasted sooooo much money "Normally", Austerity programs are simply part of the ups & downs of the "Normal" Economic cycle, which have been a "Normal" part of Economics, for much of the last 200 years or so, of the Modern Economic Era! However, this is not a "Normal" Economic cycle, owing to the prolonged impacts of Demographics, Energy Shortages/Price increases & Climate Change! Therefore the "Normal" across the board Austerity programs are (think Europe)/would be (think Australia, the USA & elsewhere) absolutely the wrong thing, at absolutely the wrong time! Indeed, many of the "Normal" Economic fixes applied via both the Austrian & Keynesian Economic schools of thought, which have previously been successfully used, will now prove to be largely ineffective That said, targeted change, to reduce expenses & primary consideration going to improving Productivity, is absolutely the correct thing, as this once in history combination of Economic drivers will continue to impact on us Locally & Globally, for decades to come. WE NEED NEW APPROACHES/SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS, WHICH ARE FAR FROM "NORMAL"! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1372809408/16#16

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 6^th, 2013 at 4:17pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 4:05pm: Must be why we just sacked the PM and Treasurer Buzz. Because we are doing so well? The AUD has tanked. Unemployment is increasing across the economy, particularly manufacturing. The resources boom is slowing. Cost of living continues to place huge pressure on families. Gross debt has increased by over 330%. Australia is not looking that good lately. Its not talking the economy down, its being honest. So Andrei, why do you think that the OZ Economy is slipping & are we alone in that slip? And, HOW DEEP & HOW LONG will the slip be? Finally, what difference would a change of government make, if any & why?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 6^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:

I'll give my views from the other side of the world here in England PN and if I knew the answer to some of those questions, I'd be in a lot more powerful position that my current one. I just closed out the ANZ result for Q2. Our revenue is being translated into the Corp result at 0.899. I look back to Q1 close and I was translating it at 1.048. In Q4 I translated it at 1.086. See a trend here? By the way that's good for our OpEx which are lower but sh*thouse for gas sales from your region... Why is it tanking? Ok here is my view. Australia has never been performing that well over the last couple of quarters. There has been an excessive boom across China which has spurred the need for resources and natural mineral production refinement. Chinas boom is slowing. As a result that will see an end to more of the masking factors if you like. Australia's manufacturing employment has not been good for a long time. I sat with a high up guy at Holden recently who told me its near on impossible to produce cars in Australia now and that are not great outlooks for GMC in Australia the next few years. Cost of living is high, competition is intense, salaries are too high in that sector. The economy is small. You're only a little country. Here in Britain we're part of a much more powerful trading block in the EU to compete with the US and Asia. Australia will find it hard to go it alone with such a small base. So to keep your competitiveness, attract investment you need much higher interest rates than we have. Thus increasing cost of living pressures with mortgages to your families etc. How does Australia get out of this slide? I don't know, I think debt increasing which you have done year on year since 2007 is not the answer. No matter what your circumstance increasing debt is not really ever am answer. What you're going to see now is essentially what's being going on for a while. An economy in trouble but just this time the Chinese growth stalling is not going to mask it anymore. There has been an intense amount of job losses in Australia lately across sectors. I recruited for a $200k Fin Controller role lately down there. The amount of guys I had the cv who had recently been made redundant was huge. Strong candidates too. It was a sign of how tough it is out there now when you have skilled experienced guys looking for a paycut to get a job. Australia has some rough days ahead I think.

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 7^th, 2013 at 9:58pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 4:36pm: Australia has never been performing that well over the last couple of quarters. There has been an excessive boom across China which has spurred the need for resources and natural mineral production refinement. Chinas boom is slowing. As a result that will see an end to more of the masking factors if you like. Australia's manufacturing employment has not been good for a long time. You're only a little country. Here in Britain we're part of a much more powerful trading block in the EU to compete with the US and Asia. Australia will find it hard to go it alone with such a small base. So to keep your competitiveness, attract investment you need much higher interest rates than we have. How does Australia get out of this slide? I don't know, I think debt increasing which you have done year on year since 2007 is not the answer. No matter what your circumstance increasing debt is not really ever am answer. What you're going to see now is essentially what's being going on for a while. An economy in trouble but just this time the Chinese growth stalling is not going to mask it anymore. Australia has some rough days ahead I think. Well Andrei, you are dwelling too much on Economic effects, when you should be looking at basic causes! In order to get a good perspective on why the OZ Economy is slipping & it is, you/we/us first need to have a good look at the Global situation, because those are the major issues impacting the OZ Economy! In order to get some proper perceptions of what  & why, things are changing, I would suggest a quick look at the major drivers that have been impacting the Global Economy, for much of the modern era, since say around 1800. The absolute standouts are - Demographics This has been the biggest & most consistent driver of Global Demand & therefore Economic Growth, certainly since 1800. Global Fertility around 1800 was about 6 children for each women, in many western countries it dipped to a low around the early 1930's (which coincided with the Great Depression), then peaked again  around 1956, before starting a relentless decline which now sees the Global rate around 2. With 2.1 being regarded as the break even point, we are now bordering on actual Population reductions and indeed some countries are already much lower than break even, with Japan & a number of European countries being prime examples. So, the Demand Growth is now slowing AND NO AMOUNT OF KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS WILL INCREASE DEMAND GROWTH BACK TO THE LEVELS OF THE LAST 40-50 YEARS! Equally, THE USUAL AUSTERITY MEASURES, TO BRING HIGH DEBT LEVELS BACK TO NORMAL, KNOWING THAT THE USUAL POPULATION GROWTH WILL EVENTUALLY SPARK DEMAND GROWTH AGAIN & THEREFORE RESTART THE ECONOMY, WILL ALSO NOT WORK THIS TIME! Energy Fossil fuels such as Coal, Oil & Gas has been one of the great "energisers/Enablers" of Global Economic Growth, since around 1800. These fuels have been both Plentiful AND Cheap, for some 200 years, BUT since around 2000 the Oil & Coal gravy train has started to run down, with supply not keeping up with the usual Demand increases & Prices therefore rising, unless the Global Economy starts to slow. Technology  The second of the great "energisers/Enablers" of Global Economic Growth, since around 1800, with Technological advances being a substantial basis of Productivity gains, which have translated into great advances in Economic Growth! Now, it MAY be possible that Technology MAY again come to our rescue & it MAY produce answers that MAY solve the Energy problem/s, BUT that would be a huge gamble to take & I simply don't believe that good Public policy should run those sort of risks AND quite frankly I think it is highly unlikely that Technology will actually solve the Energy problem/s!  So, the likely outcome is that these major Economic drivers will continue their apparent new paths & the Global & local OZ Economies will continue to experience lower Growth, than the past 40-59 years AND that will translate into a long term Economic slowdown! That slowdown will not be able to be corrected, like the usual Economic cycle and we will be obliged to look at new "solutions" against which we will measure success, although success is unlikely to have the same meaning as it once did? Finally, I am fully aware that this news is hardly palatable, BUT at least forewarned is forearmed & those who have a better idea of what the future is really likely to bring, MAY be able to live better with the likely new realities?     Oh & the following MAY be of interest, for those looking for background - http://kounfinance.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/global-economic-driver-world-population.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nvqzXM_rlw#at=17 http://www.econ.umn.edu/~guvenen/paper6.pdf http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1372809408/16#16

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 12:10am:

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 3:02pm: Maqqa wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 2:23pm: I note all the austerity talk from lefties as if it's a bad thing Facts are Austerity simply means spending less because the previous government had wasted sooooo much money "Normally", Austerity programs are simply part of the ups & downs of the "Normal" Economic cycle, which have been a "Normal" part of Economics, for much of the last 200 years or so, of the Modern Economic Era! However, this is not a "Normal" Economic cycle, owing to the prolonged impacts of Demographics, Energy Shortages/Price increases & Climate Change! Therefore the "Normal" across the board Austerity programs are (think Europe)/would be (think Australia, the USA & elsewhere) absolutely the wrong thing, at absolutely the wrong time! Indeed, many of the "Normal" Economic fixes applied via both the Austrian & Keynesian Economic schools of thought, which have previously been successfully used, will now prove to be largely ineffective That said, targeted change, to reduce expenses & primary consideration going to improving Productivity, is absolutely the correct thing, as this once in history combination of Economic drivers will continue to impact on us Locally & Globally, for decades to come. WE NEED NEW APPROACHES/SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS, WHICH ARE FAR FROM "NORMAL"! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1372809408/16#16 No response Maqqa! Because, you know what I'm saying is correct? Or because, as usual, you simply have NFI what is actually driving Economics and nor do the Liberals or Labor! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1373084587/73#73

Swagman wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 10:51am:

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 8th, 2013 at 12:10am: That said, targeted change, to reduce expenses & primary consideration going to improving Productivity, is absolutely the correct thing, as this once in history combination of Economic drivers will continue to impact on us Locally & Globally, for decades to come. WE NEED NEW APPROACHES/SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS, WHICH ARE FAR FROM "NORMAL"! I agree with most of this statement.  Productivity improvement should be top of the list. Tax reform. Reforming out of date IR policies. Concentrating on providing (affordable) incentives to industries that Australia has a competitive advantage and not cripple them with taxes . Reforming Govt services to make them more self sustainable.

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 4:18pm:

Swagman wrote on Jul 8th, 2013 at 10:51am: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 8th, 2013 at 12:10am: That said, targeted change, to reduce expenses & primary consideration going to improving Productivity, is absolutely the correct thing, as this once in history combination of Economic drivers will continue to impact on us Locally & Globally, for decades to come. WE NEED NEW APPROACHES/SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS, WHICH ARE FAR FROM "NORMAL"! I agree with most of this statement.  Productivity improvement should be top of the list. Tax reform. Reforming out of date IR policies. Concentrating on providing (affordable) incentives to industries that Australia has a competitive advantage and not cripple them with taxes . Reforming Govt services to make them more self sustainable. Well, there certainly is a lot to do! However, I would make reducing government from 3 branches to 2, as the first cab of the rank. In doing so, I would completely get rid of Local Councils, by making those services fall under the relevant State Government minister for Local government. That would remove one whole tier of graft & corruption, although there would still be plenty to go around. And, it would reduce expenses, additional red tape & unnecessary variations in local regulations. That said, there is also a heck of a lot about both Commonwealth & State governments that also need a lot of changing!

Maqqa wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 11:21pm:

PN Your posts in regards to this deserves no answer because you will demonise the LIBs for cuts but applaud the ALP for the very same cuts So you are not interested in a discussion Unless and until you admit there is a need for a cut because expenditure have skyrocketed under this Labor government - what is there to discuss Your interest was never about economic or budgetary debate

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 8^th, 2013 at 11:41pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 8th, 2013 at 11:21pm: PN Your posts in regards to this deserves no answer because you will demonise the LIBs for cuts but applaud the ALP for the very same cuts So you are not interested in a discussion Unless and until you admit there is a need for a cut because expenditure have skyrocketed under this Labor government - what is there to discuss Your interest was never about economic or budgetary debate More of your standard rubbish, Maqqa! As I have already said - Therefore the "Normal" across the board Austerity programs are (think Europe)/would be (think Australia, the USA & elsewhere) absolutely the wrong thing, at absolutely the wrong time! Indeed, many of the "Normal" Economic fixes applied via both the Austrian & Keynesian Economic schools of thought, which have previously been successfully used, will now prove to be largely ineffective That said, targeted change, to reduce expenses & primary consideration going to improving Productivity, is absolutely the correct thing, as this once in history combination of Economic drivers will continue to impact on us Locally & Globally, for decades to come. WE NEED NEW APPROACHES/SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS, WHICH ARE FAR FROM "NORMAL"! And, that applied to both major parties. The problem is, when the Libs win the forthcoming election, they will implement their standard fix (across the board Austerity) and it is simply the worst option, for a bad time! You can go ahead and bury your head in the sand & pretend it will all go away? The problem is YOUR SOLUTION IS WRONG AT THIS TIME & IT WILL MAKE A BAD SITUATION WORSE!

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 9^th, 2013 at 11:53am:

Dale Ftard wrote on Jul 9th, 2013 at 1:10am: Put that into millions or billions and you can see already investment would be threatened bu the greedy ALP. $100M or $100Bn revenue is nothing if the company and investors have spent years and $$$ in exploration and development an the greedy ALP want to tax them twice and think that a "super profit" is 6%??? WTF?? An interesting perception, Dale? However, I would suggest that $100 Billion is a large figure, not matter which way it is viewed, as backed up by the following website, which shows the Largest Corporate Annual Earnings of All Time, with the top earner being ExxonMobil in 2008 at $45.22Bn! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_corporate_profits_and_losses Oh& btw, it should come as no surprise to anyone how much those company's in the Oil & Gas sector figure in the above all time earners list!

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 26^th, 2013 at 11:27pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 26th, 2013 at 10:51pm: http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/18164803/labor-razor-gang-faces-dilemma-as-coffers-8bn-worse-off-than-predicted-in-may-budget/ The Federal Government is facing a budget dilemma, with the ABC learning revenues are around $8 billion lower than the May budget predicted. The Government's razor gang met this morning to debate whether to implement painful budget cuts before the election or delay the return to surplus, currently scheduled for 2016-17. The budget is in a tough position with the mining tax underperforming and revenue from other taxes also lower than expected. Treasurer Chris Bowen today said Australia was also facing "dramatic reductions" in its terms of trade, but reaffirmed the intention to return to surplus on schedule. The Government has got decisions to make on any potential cuts, but insiders insist the easy cuts have all already been made. One Labor source questioned whether the Government should cause budget pain for the public at a time when Labor is just starting to perform better in the polls. The Government will release its fiscal update next week, and Treasury will release its own accounting, the pre-election fiscal outlook (PEFO), early in the election campaign. Earlier Friday, Opposition treasury spokesman Joe Hockey questioned the motives for the release of the Government's fiscal update so close to the PEFO. "Why is the Government releasing a comprehensive economic statement just a few days before the pre-election fiscal outlook? It is about trying to bully the Treasury into a fixed set of numbers," he said. Mr Hockey questioned the independence of Treasury by saying the Coalition would not rely on its figures to frame its policy costings because they could not be trusted. That was despite earlier in the year saying "the only numbers than we can rely on are the PEFO numbers released by the heads of department during the course of the election campaign". Mr Hockey now says every time the Government publishes budget figures they are "dead-set wrong". He says the Coalition will instead base its policy costings on figures from the Parliamentary Budget Office, state Coalition governments and independent advisers. The Treasurer has rejected Mr Hockey's assertions about Treasury's independence. "It is an insult not to me but to the Treasury and the Department of Finance, and I am sick and tired of the Opposition trashing the reputation of Australia's public servants," Mr Bowen said. Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has backed his treasury spokesman. "Joe was making the point that figures from this Government have never turned out to be true; never, never, never starting from their very first budget." No sh!t Sherlock! Pity is, that you, the Liberals & Labor, NONE OF YOU HAVE AY IDEA OF THE CAUSE, LET ALONE WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE OVER THE LAST 40-50 YEARS, NOR WHAT YOU SHOULD DO OVER THE NEXT 40-50 YEARS!!!

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 12:43pm:

cods wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 7:59am: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 26th, 2013 at 11:27pm: No sh!t Sherlock! Pity is, that you, the Liberals & Labor, NONE OF YOU HAVE AY IDEA OF THE CAUSE, LET ALONE WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE OVER THE LAST 40-50 YEARS, NOR WHAT YOU SHOULD DO OVER THE NEXT 40-50 YEARS!!!    hey perc?.... has your life worked out exactly as you planned it 40/50 years ago?????.. I am not sure how anyone plans for "earthquakes".that may or may not happen in their lives.. but you must have done. Unlike most natural earthquakes, where we mere mortals remain unaware of the quake, until they actually happen or at least very close to the event, this particular Global Economic earthquake has had indicators for about 40-50 years. Certainly "those in the know", those with access to all the relevant Demographic, Energy Supply/Pricing & Climate factors have either known or should have known quite some time ago. They ("those in the know OR thought they did") thought - 1) Like Longy, it had not happened before, so it never would! 2) "Something", like the cavalry riding to the rescue, would come along to save this from becoming a reality? 3) Then there were those who deliberately turned the other way, preferring short term rewards for themselves and a select few, at great cost to the long term future of the bulk of the Local & Global  Public! Whatever our view/s on what worked in the past & there were appropriate times for both Keynesian & Austrian Economic fixes, the reality of the current Global GFC is that neither Keynesian & Austrian Economic fixes will work, as they did previously and nor will the current "money printing" of the likes of Japan & the USA! In my judgement, the standard Liberal across the board AUS-terity cuts (Austrian fix), which would have worked on most occasions over the last 200 years or so, is now the worst o all options, BUT neither will the Labor Keynesian approach work, although it would stretch the final demise out for a little longer, until Debt finally overwhelms the system. This time we really will need to change the whole system and everyone will either contribute their fair share or they will all share in a greater amount of Economic pain! There are now, no easy options, 40-50 years of inappropriate activity by those on both the Left & Right o Politics & those at the top of the tree, have ensured that only difficult options now remain! Good luck!

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 3:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 2:48pm: cods wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 7:59am: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 26th, 2013 at 11:27pm: Maqqa wrote on Jul 26th, 2013 at 10:51pm: http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/18164803/labor-razor-gang-faces-dilemma-as-coffers-8bn-worse-off-than-predicted-in-may-budget/ The Federal Government is facing a budget dilemma, with the ABC learning revenues are around $8 billion lower than the May budget predicted. The Government's razor gang met this morning to debate whether to implement painful budget cuts before the election or delay the return to surplus, currently scheduled for 2016-17. The budget is in a tough position with the mining tax underperforming and revenue from other taxes also lower than expected. Treasurer Chris Bowen today said Australia was also facing "dramatic reductions" in its terms of trade, but reaffirmed the intention to return to surplus on schedule. The Government has got decisions to make on any potential cuts, but insiders insist the easy cuts have all already been made. One Labor source questioned whether the Government should cause budget pain for the public at a time when Labor is just starting to perform better in the polls. The Government will release its fiscal update next week, and Treasury will release its own accounting, the pre-election fiscal outlook (PEFO), early in the election campaign. Earlier Friday, Opposition treasury spokesman Joe Hockey questioned the motives for the release of the Government's fiscal update so close to the PEFO. "Why is the Government releasing a comprehensive economic statement just a few days before the pre-election fiscal outlook? It is about trying to bully the Treasury into a fixed set of numbers," he said. Mr Hockey questioned the independence of Treasury by saying the Coalition would not rely on its figures to frame its policy costings because they could not be trusted. That was despite earlier in the year saying "the only numbers than we can rely on are the PEFO numbers released by the heads of department during the course of the election campaign". Mr Hockey now says every time the Government publishes budget figures they are "dead-set wrong". He says the Coalition will instead base its policy costings on figures from the Parliamentary Budget Office, state Coalition governments and independent advisers. The Treasurer has rejected Mr Hockey's assertions about Treasury's independence. "It is an insult not to me but to the Treasury and the Department of Finance, and I am sick and tired of the Opposition trashing the reputation of Australia's public servants," Mr Bowen said. Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has backed his treasury spokesman. "Joe was making the point that figures from this Government have never turned out to be true; never, never, never starting from their very first budget." No sh!t Sherlock! Pity is, that you, the Liberals & Labor, NONE OF YOU HAVE AY IDEA OF THE CAUSE, LET ALONE WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE OVER THE LAST 40-50 YEARS, NOR WHAT YOU SHOULD DO OVER THE NEXT 40-50 YEARS!!!    hey perc?.... has your life worked out exactly as you planned it 40/50 years ago?????.. I am not sure how anyone plans for "earthquakes".that may or may not happen in their lives.. but you must have done. you will also not that Prozac_now never comes up with any solutions - just criticism.  He hates debt and hates spending cuts.  he seems to want it both ways while blaming everyone for everything. clearly his medication is not working, You assume too much, as usual! A solution, for everything, there is NOT! As usual, you statements do not reflect the truth! I have no problem with Debt, Spending Cuts or Economic Stimulation measures, in the appropriate circumstances, of which there have been many, over the years, BUT NONE OF THEM WILL WORK NOW, FOR THE SHORT TO MEDIUM TERM, as the entire system has been destabilised over the last 40-50 years!

Maqqa wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 3:31pm:

It's interesting when bad things happen - perception will blame the LibLab But perception offers no alternative party that will win the required 70+ seats to form government When pressed further - it is clear perception is a Labor voter

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:47pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 3:55pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 3:28pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 2:48pm: cods wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 7:59am: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 26th, 2013 at 11:27pm: Maqqa wrote on Jul 26th, 2013 at 10:51pm: http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/18164803/labor-razor-gang-faces-dilemma-as-coffers-8bn-worse-off-than-predicted-in-may-budget/ The Federal Government is facing a budget dilemma, with the ABC learning revenues are around $8 billion lower than the May budget predicted. The Government's razor gang met this morning to debate whether to implement painful budget cuts before the election or delay the return to surplus, currently scheduled for 2016-17. The budget is in a tough position with the mining tax underperforming and revenue from other taxes also lower than expected. Treasurer Chris Bowen today said Australia was also facing "dramatic reductions" in its terms of trade, but reaffirmed the intention to return to surplus on schedule. The Government has got decisions to make on any potential cuts, but insiders insist the easy cuts have all already been made. One Labor source questioned whether the Government should cause budget pain for the public at a time when Labor is just starting to perform better in the polls. The Government will release its fiscal update next week, and Treasury will release its own accounting, the pre-election fiscal outlook (PEFO), early in the election campaign. Earlier Friday, Opposition treasury spokesman Joe Hockey questioned the motives for the release of the Government's fiscal update so close to the PEFO. "Why is the Government releasing a comprehensive economic statement just a few days before the pre-election fiscal outlook? It is about trying to bully the Treasury into a fixed set of numbers," he said. Mr Hockey questioned the independence of Treasury by saying the Coalition would not rely on its figures to frame its policy costings because they could not be trusted. That was despite earlier in the year saying "the only numbers than we can rely on are the PEFO numbers released by the heads of department during the course of the election campaign". Mr Hockey now says every time the Government publishes budget figures they are "dead-set wrong". He says the Coalition will instead base its policy costings on figures from the Parliamentary Budget Office, state Coalition governments and independent advisers. The Treasurer has rejected Mr Hockey's assertions about Treasury's independence. "It is an insult not to me but to the Treasury and the Department of Finance, and I am sick and tired of the Opposition trashing the reputation of Australia's public servants," Mr Bowen said. Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has backed his treasury spokesman. "Joe was making the point that figures from this Government have never turned out to be true; never, never, never starting from their very first budget." No sh!t Sherlock! Pity is, that you, the Liberals & Labor, NONE OF YOU HAVE AY IDEA OF THE CAUSE, LET ALONE WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE OVER THE LAST 40-50 YEARS, NOR WHAT YOU SHOULD DO OVER THE NEXT 40-50 YEARS!!!    hey perc?.... has your life worked out exactly as you planned it 40/50 years ago?????.. I am not sure how anyone plans for "earthquakes".that may or may not happen in their lives.. but you must have done. you will also not that Prozac_now never comes up with any solutions - just criticism.  He hates debt and hates spending cuts.  he seems to want it both ways while blaming everyone for everything. clearly his medication is not working, You assume too much, as usual! A solution, for everything, there is NOT! As usual, you statements do not reflect the truth! I have no problem with Debt, Spending Cuts or Economic Stimulation measures, in the appropriate circumstances, of which there have been many, over the years, BUT NONE OF THEM WILL WORK NOW, FOR THE SHORT TO MEDIUM TERM, as the entire system has been destabilised over the last 40-50 years! so in short, you are saying that you have no answers or solutions.  WHICH WAS EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, oh depressed one. As usual, your statement is incorrect! You said that, I never comes up with any solutions. What I  said is that, there is not necessarily a solution for everything & in this instance there is no solution, which would restore the "status quo", in either the short or medium term and certainly not without a great deal of shared pain for all!  Btw, which of the following options, per my following post, do you think primarily fit you OR is it simply all of them? They ("those in the know OR thought they did") thought - 1) Like Longy, it had not happened before, so it never would! 2) "Something", like the cavalry riding to the rescue, would come along to save this from becoming a reality? 3) Then there were those who deliberately turned the other way, preferring short term rewards for themselves and a select few, at great cost to the long term future of the bulk of the Local & Global  Public! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1374843119/16#16

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:56pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 3:31pm: It's interesting when bad things happen - perception will blame the LibLab But perception offers no alternative party that will win the required 70+ seats to form government When pressed further - it is clear perception is a Labor voter As usual Maqqa, you are incorrect! On voting record I said many times, I have voted Liberal, Labor & candle stick maker, depending on the circumstances. As for recommending an alternative, Why would I offer any Political Party, in the current circumstances, as NONE ARE CAPABLE OF FIXING THAT WHICH TOOK LABOR & THE LIBERALS SOME 40-50 YEARS OF STUPIDITY & GREED! And yes, I largely blame the Lib/Labs, their short-termism, their dis-regard of reality & their cow-tailing to vested interests!

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 28^th, 2013 at 3:40pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 28th, 2013 at 3:28pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 7:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 6:58pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 6:47pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 3:55pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 3:28pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 2:48pm: cods wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 7:59am: hey perc?.... has your life worked out exactly as you planned it 40/50 years ago?????.. I am not sure how anyone plans for "earthquakes".that may or may not happen in their lives.. but you must have done. you will also not that Prozac_now never comes up with any solutions - just criticism.  He hates debt and hates spending cuts.  he seems to want it both ways while blaming everyone for everything. clearly his medication is not working, You assume too much, as usual! A solution, for everything, there is NOT! As usual, you statements do not reflect the truth! I have no problem with Debt, Spending Cuts or Economic Stimulation measures, in the appropriate circumstances, of which there have been many, over the years, BUT NONE OF THEM WILL WORK NOW, FOR THE SHORT TO MEDIUM TERM, as the entire system has been destabilised over the last 40-50 years! so in short, you are saying that you have no answers or solutions.  WHICH WAS EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, oh depressed one. As usual, your statement is incorrect! You said that, I never comes up with any solutions. What I  said is that, there is not necessarily a solution for everything & in this instance there is no solution, which would restore the "status quo", in either the short or medium term and certainly not without a great deal of shared pain for all!  Btw, which of the following options, per my following post, do you think primarily fit you OR is it simply all of them? They ("those in the know OR thought they did") thought - 1) Like Longy, it had not happened before, so it never would! 2) "Something", like the cavalry riding to the rescue, would come along to save this from becoming a reality? 3) Then there were those who deliberately turned the other way, preferring short term rewards for themselves and a select few, at great cost to the long term future of the bulk of the Local & Global  Public! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1374843119/16#16 you certainly are a weirdo, Prozac_now.  I say you have never provided solutions and your protesting reply includes... NOT ONE SOLUTION.  has it ever occurred to you that you could skewer  my comments by simply providing those self-same solutions? you talk and talk ad nauseum, criticising anyone and everyone for their economic policies and promises and yet not once, do you ever offer an alternative.  That's lame enough on its own but when you say that you HAVE but never post them... you look like a weirdo. Did you ever learn how to read Longy, I said - "What I  said is that, there is not necessarily a solution for everything & in this instance there is no solution, which would restore the "status quo", in either the short or medium term and certainly not without a great deal of shared pain for all!"  Did you ever learn how to read Longy, I said - "What I  said is that, there is not necessarily a solution for everything & in this instance there is no solution, which would restore the "status quo", in either the short or medium term and certainly not without a great deal of shared pain for all!" You really do have some serious lack of capacities, in a number of areas! How's your education going Longy? Have you learned about the 3R's yet? You know - Reading, Riting & Rithmetic? Well, at least, you got a chance with the Riting, after all you are on the Rite side of politics? all you ever is 'gah! we are all going to die' and then say there are no solutions.  Of what value do you think you are to anyone?  You are the same bozo saying we would run out of oil in 1985 and even worse... still say so.

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 28^th, 2013 at 11:13pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 28th, 2013 at 3:40pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 28th, 2013 at 3:28pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 7:13pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 6:58pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 6:47pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 3:55pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 3:28pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 2:48pm: cods wrote on Jul 27th, 2013 at 7:59am: hey perc?.... has your life worked out exactly as you planned it 40/50 years ago?????.. I am not sure how anyone plans for "earthquakes".that may or may not happen in their lives.. but you must have done. you will also not that Prozac_now never comes up with any solutions - just criticism.  He hates debt and hates spending cuts.  he seems to want it both ways while blaming everyone for everything. clearly his medication is not working, You assume too much, as usual! A solution, for everything, there is NOT! As usual, you statements do not reflect the truth! I have no problem with Debt, Spending Cuts or Economic Stimulation measures, in the appropriate circumstances, of which there have been many, over the years, BUT NONE OF THEM WILL WORK NOW, FOR THE SHORT TO MEDIUM TERM, as the entire system has been destabilised over the last 40-50 years! so in short, you are saying that you have no answers or solutions.  WHICH WAS EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, oh depressed one. As usual, your statement is incorrect! You said that, I never comes up with any solutions. What I  said is that, there is not necessarily a solution for everything & in this instance there is no solution, which would restore the "status quo", in either the short or medium term and certainly not without a great deal of shared pain for all!  Btw, which of the following options, per my following post, do you think primarily fit you OR is it simply all of them? They ("those in the know OR thought they did") thought - 1) Like Longy, it had not happened before, so it never would! 2) "Something", like the cavalry riding to the rescue, would come along to save this from becoming a reality? 3) Then there were those who deliberately turned the other way, preferring short term rewards for themselves and a select few, at great cost to the long term future of the bulk of the Local & Global  Public! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1374843119/16#16 you certainly are a weirdo, Prozac_now.  I say you have never provided solutions and your protesting reply includes... NOT ONE SOLUTION.  has it ever occurred to you that you could skewer  my comments by simply providing those self-same solutions? you talk and talk ad nauseum, criticising anyone and everyone for their economic policies and promises and yet not once, do you ever offer an alternative.  That's lame enough on its own but when you say that you HAVE but never post them... you look like a weirdo. Did you ever learn how to read Longy, I said - "What I  said is that, there is not necessarily a solution for everything & in this instance there is no solution, which would restore the "status quo", in either the short or medium term and certainly not without a great deal of shared pain for all!"  Did you ever learn how to read Longy, I said - "What I  said is that, there is not necessarily a solution for everything & in this instance there is no solution, which would restore the "status quo", in either the short or medium term and certainly not without a great deal of shared pain for all!" You really do have some serious lack of capacities, in a number of areas! How's your education going Longy? Have you learned about the 3R's yet? You know - Reading, Riting & Rithmetic? Well, at least, you got a chance with the Riting, after all you are on the Rite side of politics? all you ever is 'gah! we are all going to die' and then say there are no solutions. Of what value do you think you are to anyone?  You are the same bozo saying we would run out of oil in 1985 and even worse... still say so. As usual Longy, YOU ARE INCORRECT! I have never said, we are all going to die, IT IS YOU WHO JUST SAID THAT! Also, I never said, we were going to run out of oil in 1985, BUT yes, we certainly will run out at some stage, AS OIL IS MOST DEINITELY A FINITE RESOURCE, don't you know!  And, as for solutions, apparently you still, continue to fail the 4R's - Reading wRiting aRithmetic & compRehension So, I say again - "What I  said is that, there is not necessarily a solution for everything & in this instance there is no solution, which would restore the "status quo", in either the short or medium term and certainly not without a great deal of shared pain for all!"

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 1^st, 2013 at 1:44pm:

I would suggest that a few questions need to be asked - 1) Why is the RBA forcing down interest rates & what is their aim in doing so? 2) Why is the RBA, forcing down the OZ$ exchange rate & what is their aim in doing so? AND, why are the labor  & the Liberal party's happy for this to be happening? Those questions put, I will provide the following links to interest rates here in OZ, in Japan, in the Eurozone & in the USA. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/interest-rate http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/interest-rate http://www.tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/interest-rate http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate Let me also provide a link to the last 5 years of the US$index - http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/dxy I should observe that what the RBA are now doing with lowering interest rates has been a standard Central Bank measure and has often been employed in the past to provoke greater Economic activity, particularly in the Housing area AND it has usually been successful, both in OZ & elsewhere around the world. I should also note that the OZ$ Vs the US$, has had ups & downs and is not by itself indicative of a measure to fix our Economic ills! http://www.news.com.au/business/australian-dollar Finally, or all those who think that lower interests rates will fix everything or at least most things, I suggest you look at what have been effectively zero rates in Japan since 1995, in the Eurozone since 2009 & in the USA since 2009, with effectively no Economic gains anywhere, including their housing sectors. In closing, I will make the observation that, the reasoning behind the RBA's moves will not work any better here, than similar moves elsewhere, END OF STORY!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 1^st, 2013 at 1:46pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 1st, 2013 at 1:44pm: I would suggest that a few questions need to be asked - 1) Why is the RBA forcing down interest rates & what is their aim in doing so? 2) Why is the RBA, forcing down the OZ$ exchange rate & what is their aim in doing so? AND, why are the labor  & the Liberal party's happy for this to be happening? Those questions put, I will provide the following links to interest rates here in OZ, in Japan, in the Eurozone & in the USA. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/interest-rate http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/interest-rate http://www.tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/interest-rate http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate Let me also provide a link to the last 5 years of the US$index - http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/index/dxy I should observe that what the RBA are now doing with lowering interest rates has been a standard Central Bank measure and has often been employed in the past to provoke greater Economic activity, particularly in the Housing area AND it has usually been successful, both in OZ & elsewhere around the world. I should also note that the OZ$ Vs the US$, has had ups & downs and is not by itself indicative of a measure to fix our Economic ills! http://www.news.com.au/business/australian-dollar Finally, or all those who think that lower interests rates will fix everything or at least most things, I suggest you look at what have been effectively zero rates in Japan since 1995, in the Eurozone since 2009 & in the USA since 2009, with effectively no Economic gains anywhere, including their housing sectors. In closing, I will make the observation that, the reasoning behind the RBA's moves will not work any better here, than similar moves elsewhere, END OF STORY! PS - it would be nice if you'all could converse with each other, without it degenerating!

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 12:18pm:

To quote Alan Kohler... "Australian national government is currently running at a $30 billion loss because the average annual growth in revenue fell from 7.4 per cent in the decade to 2007 to 4 per cent over the following six years, while spending growth kicked up from an average of 6.2 to 8 per cent a year." The drop in revenue excuse is false.  The rate of increase in Revenue has slowed but only to the extent that it is lower than the time of the mining boom.  Responsible govt would have factored in reduced revenue.  Treasury were stupid enough to continue to predict pre-GFC revenues to continue but a clever Treasurer would have known to downgrade their estimates.  But in an environment of reducing revenues what does Labor do?  Increase the rate of spending growth by 20%. the fundamental problem with Labors budget is simple: bad forecasting, too much spending.

True Colours wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 2:07pm:

Many economists will tell you that there are times when governments should run deficits. In light of the GFC, and the subsequent end to the resources boom, the economy needs the government to run a surplus. Australia has done fairly well under Labor in a difficult global environment: OECD Public Debt 2012 http://www.factsfightback.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/banner-750x380-debt-oecd1-470x260.png

http://www.factsfightback.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/banner-750x380-debt-oecd1-470x260.png

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 10:19pm:

True Colours wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 2:07pm: Many economists will tell you that there are times when governments should run deficits. In light of the GFC, and the subsequent end to the resources boom, the economy needs the government to run a surplus. Australia has done fairly well under Labor in a difficult global environment: OECD Public Debt 2012 http://www.factsfightback.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/banner-750x380-debt-oecd1-470x260.png It says quite a bit about Longy's argument that he won't/can't answer the logic of such a simple & accurate statement, instead he does a Maqqa & avoids the real substantive discussions! The fact is that in the Real world, Economics has had a time & a place for both Deficits, Stimilus & much more. Normally, in modern Economics, it is a complicated world, it is certainly not as simple as "you must always run at a Budget Surplus". But now, it is even more complicated than usual, because now  there are 3 unique factors influencing events & even the Economic standards used by Austrian & Keynesian Economics are now likely to fail! Not that Longy &/or Maqqa have idea about what is happening, but they are in good company, because neither does the Liberal or Labor party's! When it comes to current Economics both Longy & Maqqa, truly have NFI!!!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 11:46am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 8:40am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 1:40pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 1:29pm: and you want to give this vacuous hole your vote??? No I do not I wanted to vote for Gillard Someone who truly gave a sh!t about Australia, not just Corporate Australia. Frankly if I'm honest my ballot will read bugger you, & I'll vote Pirate Party in the Senate just to niggle you ;) On the assumption that you are male I question how you think Gillard cared about you?  Towards the end she made it very clear that she hates men and will promote women above men at any opportunity.  I think you are one of the very few with a penis that thinks Gillard was governing for them.  Vote pirate party if you want.  It will end up with Labor anyhow. Possibly the weakest & most stupid argument I've seen you post. But the party officials must think it gets traction. May well do with idiots. Does NDIS only apply to women? Does "Better Schools" as Rudds renamed it to take credit only apply to daughters? You will NEVER see policies like the above ever again from either side, social policies designed with making a better quality of life at the fore front instead of turning a profit. Oh, I wouldn't go that far, I've seen Longy say some VERY stupid things! He even seems to "think" that governments must always be in Surplus, contrary to most Economists & the vast reality of history, which says that isn't so! Then, he refuses to discuss this or any other issue, where someone makes sense AND disagrees with Longy, HEAVEN FORBID!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 6:39pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 5:29pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 5:26pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 10:19pm: True Colours wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 2:07pm: Many economists will tell you that there are times when governments should run deficits. In light of the GFC, and the subsequent end to the resources boom, the economy needs the government to run a surplus. Australia has done fairly well under Labor in a difficult global environment: OECD Public Debt 2012 http://www.factsfightback.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/banner-750x380-debt-oecd1-470x260.png It says quite a bit about Longy's argument that he won't/can't answer the logic of such a simple & accurate statement, instead he does a Maqqa & avoids the real substantive discussions! The fact is that in the Real world, Economics has had a time & a place for both Deficits, Stimilus & much more. Normally, in modern Economics, it is a complicated world, it is certainly not as simple as "you must always run at a Budget Surplus". But now, it is even more complicated than usual, because now  there are 3 unique factors influencing events & even the Economic standards used by Austrian & Keynesian Economics are now likely to fail! Not that Longy &/or Maqqa have idea about what is happening, but they are in good company, because neither does the Liberal or Labor party's! When it comes to current Economics both Longy & Maqqa, truly have NFI!!! As I have said previously, Longy &  Maqqa are both into SPIN, BUT both avoid the real substantive discussions, particularly on - 1) Global Economics & how that affects OZ! 2) The current, major drivers of Local & Global Economics and how they affect OZ! 3) The REALITIES of Economics in general, including how & why Austrian & Keynesian Economics have combined together in the past. Why? Because both truly have NFI, when it comes to the Realities of Global &or Local Economics! and while you endlessly wank on about such facts as running out of oil in 1985 your only commentary is to criticise and then offer zero solutions beyond voting out every Mp every time. As usual, YOU ARE INCORRECT! You fail miserably, because you incessantly fail the 4R's! Oh, but you MAY be improving, "just a tiny bit", because you have picked up "my vote out every incumbent edict", as that may be the only way of getting the establishments attention! Oh & btw, you still haven't answered any of the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE Economic issues, BUT that's not unusual, because you have NFI what is actually happening!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 7:07pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 6:47pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 6:39pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 5:29pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 5:26pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 10:19pm: True Colours wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 2:07pm: Many economists will tell you that there are times when governments should run deficits. In light of the GFC, and the subsequent end to the resources boom, the economy needs the government to run a surplus. Australia has done fairly well under Labor in a difficult global environment: OECD Public Debt 2012 http://www.factsfightback.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/banner-750x380-debt-oecd1-470x260.png It says quite a bit about Longy's argument that he won't/can't answer the logic of such a simple & accurate statement, instead he does a Maqqa & avoids the real substantive discussions! The fact is that in the Real world, Economics has had a time & a place for both Deficits, Stimilus & much more. Normally, in modern Economics, it is a complicated world, it is certainly not as simple as "you must always run at a Budget Surplus". But now, it is even more complicated than usual, because now  there are 3 unique factors influencing events & even the Economic standards used by Austrian & Keynesian Economics are now likely to fail! Not that Longy &/or Maqqa have idea about what is happening, but they are in good company, because neither does the Liberal or Labor party's! When it comes to current Economics both Longy & Maqqa, truly have NFI!!! As I have said previously, Longy &  Maqqa are both into SPIN, BUT both avoid the real substantive discussions, particularly on - 1) Global Economics & how that affects OZ! 2) The current, major drivers of Local & Global Economics and how they affect OZ! 3) The REALITIES of Economics in general, including how & why Austrian & Keynesian Economics have combined together in the past. Why? Because both truly have NFI, when it comes to the Realities of Global &or Local Economics! and while you endlessly wank on about such facts as running out of oil in 1985 your only commentary is to criticise and then offer zero solutions beyond voting out every Mp every time. As usual, YOU ARE INCORRECT! You fail miserably, because you incessantly fail the 4R's! Oh, but you MAY be improving, "just a tiny bit", because you have picked up "my vote out every incumbent edict", as that may be the only way of getting the establishments attention! Oh & btw, you still haven't answered any of the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE Economic issues, BUT that's not unusual, because you have NFI what is actually happening!  And where are your ideas?? oh of course... you don't have any beyond this idiotic notion that cabinet should be composed entirely of people who a month ago were teachers, gardeners and union reps.  No experience in parliament itself nevermind managing the largest corporation in the country. so why not actually give us your IDEAS instead of your antiquated and contractirory garbage. I have frequently & repeatedly put my ideas in writing, following are some examples - http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375798381/42#42 http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376185892/all http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376351268/7#7 You may have read them & more, but it wouldn't make much difference, your 4R's a just not that flash! Oh & as I have said many times, the re-instating of the status quo (that you are wanting) simply isn't about to happen! This time, everyone will have to bear their fair share of the pain, because Pollies (of all description) got it so wrong, over the last 50-60 years!! However, I have no doubt there will be too many others, like you, who will try to avoid their fair share of the pain, so our problems will be deeper & last longer than they should!!!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 8:45am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 7:07pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 6:47pm: And where are your ideas?? oh of course... you don't have any beyond this idiotic notion that cabinet should be composed entirely of people who a month ago were teachers, gardeners and union reps.  No experience in parliament itself nevermind managing the largest corporation in the country. so why not actually give us your IDEAS instead of your antiquated and contractirory garbage. I have frequently & repeatedly put my ideas in writing, following are some examples - http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375798381/42#42 http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376185892/all http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376351268/7#7 You may have read them & more, but it wouldn't make much difference, your 4R's a just not that flash! Oh & as I have said many times, the re-instating of the status quo (that you are wanting) simply isn't about to happen! This time, everyone will have to bear their fair share of the pain, because Pollies (of all description) got it so wrong, over the last 50-60 years!! However, I have no doubt there will be too many others, like you, who will try to avoid their fair share of the pain, so our problems will be deeper & last longer than they should!!! you have a truly odd and bizarre concept of 'ideas'.  You don't actually propose alternative polices at all.  I am sure that deep within the morass inside your head you THINK you are promoting alternative policies but they don't actually make it to the keyboard.  Nowhere in your ravings where you lamblast every current version of economic policy do you actually come up with any ACTUAL POLICIES. you need help - at least in how to write. 1) You're still stuck in SPIN MODE Longy & you still haven't addressed the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE issues behind the Global & Local Economic collapse! 2) YOU are still pretending that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally. You refer to the Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007. However, you disregard the facts that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND you disregard history which says that Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt 3) The fundamental problem/s facing Australia is NOT SIMPLE, as you suggest & not just bad forecasting, as you suggest, although clearly forecasting is & has been a problem for quite some time, for both Labor & Liberal thus creating a gross under-estimation of the problems we now face! 4) Your solution, as usual, is simply retsoring the OZ Economy to what it was. THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN! IN FACT, IT CAN NOT HAPPEN, because a number of major Economic drivers have changed direction (over time - 50-60 years) and all political party's & Treasury have done what you are doing, ignoring the problems, in hope they will magically disappear. BUT, THEY WILL NOT, THEY CAN NOT & WE ARE NOW FACED WITH A LONG TERM SYSTEMIC SLOWDOWN, WHICH IS NOW UNAVOIDABLE! The best we can try for now, is to avoid the worst outcomes, by everyone taking their fair share of pain & by getting stuck into some of the areas I have previously referred to, those being - a) A concentration on Productivity & I would start with reducing government by one entire level, that being Local Councils & a complete review of Government, including ALL Taxes & All Expenditures! b) However, this will require great care on specifics, NOT AN ACROSS THE BOARD AUSTERITY DRIVE, WHICH WOULD SIMPLY DRIVE THE ECONOMY FURTHER SOUTH! c) The thing that neither YOU NOR MAQQA seem capable of comprenhending is ALL ACTIONS & INACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES and your simple SPIN WILL NOT SOLVE ANYTHING! THE REAL LOCAL & GLOBAL ECONOMIC DRIVERS ARE NOW - 1) DEMOGRAPHICS 2) ENERGY (LACK OF SUPPLY TO KEEP UP WITH DEMAND & RISING PRICES) 3) CLIMATE CHANGE THE ABOVE ARE BASIC ECONOMIC CAUSES, EVERYTHING ELSE ARE EFFECTS, WHICH FLOW FROM THOSE CAUSES! You, Maqqa & others, MAY OR MAY NOT AGREE, but THEY ARE NOW THE REALITIES OF GLOBAL ECONOMICS & THEY ARE NOT GOING ANYWHERE, NOT FOR QUITE SOME TIME!!! I suggest YOU get used to this new REALITY & stop dreaming of what used to be, Mr Longy Van Winkle!

cods wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 11:53am:

sh1t perc give it a rest.. the GFC wasnt our problem remember??? until the left made it our problem...its done its dusted.. for gods sake give it a rest.you are getting as bad as all the rest it all comes back to putting down the messenger...and the name calling....boring and childish.. if you are such a wow as an economist why dont you go and work for rudd I think he could use you.you are wasted on here obviously.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 12:20pm:

cods wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 11:53am: sh1t perc give it a rest.. the GFC wasnt our problem remember??? until the left made it our problem...its done its dusted.. for gods sake give it a rest.you are getting as bad as all the rest it all comes back to putting down the messenger...and the name calling....boring and childish.. if you are such a wow as an economist why dont you go and work for rudd I think he could use you.you are wasted on here obviously. When you say "our problem" Cods, it seems you are saying "the Liberal party" didn't have a hand in where we now find ourselves? However, as I have said previously, whilst the Liberal party did bring down OZ Debt during the Howard years, they did so, with the assistance of the biggest Global Boom of the modern era & frankly whilst they did a better job than many Politicians overseas, they should have & could have, done much better, as should the Labor party over the last 50-60 years! Unfortunately Cods, IT (the GFC) IS NOT DONE & DUSTED, the GFC still has a long way to run. Oh & I am not, putting down the messenger, nor am I name calling except for a select few who deserve what they get, because they hand it out first and even then, I am quite restrained! Boring & childish? Yes, quite a bit of the Political banter is that! No, I will not go to work for Rudd, Abbott nor any Political party, as they are now a large part of the problem, they are clearly nothing to do with any solutions! Btw, I hope you got a little info on your Debt enquiry, from the following site I posted in my earlier reply to Longy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 12:42pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 12:22pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 12:19pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 11:43am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 8:45am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 7:07pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 6:47pm: And where are your ideas?? oh of course... you don't have any beyond this idiotic notion that cabinet should be composed entirely of people who a month ago were teachers, gardeners and union reps.  No experience in parliament itself nevermind managing the largest corporation in the country. so why not actually give us your IDEAS instead of your antiquated and contractirory garbage. I have frequently & repeatedly put my ideas in writing, following are some examples - http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375798381/42#42 http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376185892/all http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376351268/7#7 You may have read them & more, but it wouldn't make much difference, your 4R's a just not that flash! Oh & as I have said many times, the re-instating of the status quo (that you are wanting) simply isn't about to happen! This time, everyone will have to bear their fair share of the pain, because Pollies (of all description) got it so wrong, over the last 50-60 years!! However, I have no doubt there will be too many others, like you, who will try to avoid their fair share of the pain, so our problems will be deeper & last longer than they should!!! you have a truly odd and bizarre concept of 'ideas'.  You don't actually propose alternative polices at all.  I am sure that deep within the morass inside your head you THINK you are promoting alternative policies but they don't actually make it to the keyboard.  Nowhere in your ravings where you lamblast every current version of economic policy do you actually come up with any ACTUAL POLICIES. you need help - at least in how to write. 1) You're still stuck in SPIN MODE Longy & you still haven't addressed the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE issues behind the Global & Local Economic collapse! 2) YOU are still pretending that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally. You refer to the Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007. However, you disregard the facts that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND you disregard history which says that Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt 3) The fundamental problem/s facing Australia is NOT SIMPLE, as you suggest & not just bad forecasting, as you suggest, although clearly forecasting is & has been a problem for quite some time, for both Labor & Liberal thus creating a gross under-estimation of the problems we now face! 4) Your solution, as usual, is simply retsoring the OZ Economy to what it was. THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN! IN FACT, IT CAN NOT HAPPEN, because a number of major Economic drivers have changed direction (over time - 50-60 years) and all political party's & Treasury have done what you are doing, ignoring the problems, in hope they will magically disappear. BUT, THEY WILL NOT, THEY CAN NOT & WE ARE NOW FACED WITH A LONG TERM SYSTEMIC SLOWDOWN, WHICH IS NOW UNAVOIDABLE! The best we can try for now, is to avoid the worst outcomes, by everyone taking their fair share of pain & by getting stuck into some of the areas I have previously referred to, those being - a) A concentration on Productivity & I would start with reducing government by one entire level, that being Local Councils & a complete review of Government, including ALL Taxes & All Expenditures! b) However, this will require great care on specifics, NOT AN ACROSS THE BOARD AUSTERITY DRIVE, WHICH WOULD SIMPLY DRIVE THE ECONOMY FURTHER SOUTH! c) The thing that neither YOU NOR MAQQA seem capable of comprenhending is ALL ACTIONS & INACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES and your simple SPIN WILL NOT SOLVE ANYTHING! THE REAL LOCAL & GLOBAL ECONOMIC DRIVERS ARE NOW - 1) DEMOGRAPHICS 2) ENERGY (LACK OF SUPPLY TO KEEP UP WITH DEMAND & RISING PRICES) 3) CLIMATE CHANGE THE ABOVE ARE BASIC ECONOMIC CAUSES, EVERYTHING ELSE ARE EFFECTS, WHICH FLOW FROM THOSE CAUSES! You, Maqqa & others, MAY OR MAY NOT AGREE, but THEY ARE NOW THE REALITIES OF GLOBAL ECONOMICS & THEY ARE NOT GOING ANYWHERE, NOT FOR QUITE SOME TIME!!! I suggest YOU get used to this new REALITY & stop dreaming of what used to be, Mr Longy Van Winkle!    and where in this the 964th retelling of the same thing is YOUR SOLUTIONS?    You keep claiming to have them so where are they? You truly are 4R's inhibited, Longy!!! so list them all here, right now. Actual suggestions and solution.  No one else has been able to find them in your scribbling's.  so there is your challenge.  speak to us oh economic oracle and give us your wisdom.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 1:46pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 12:42pm: so list them all here, right now. Actual suggestions and solution.  No one else has been able to find them in your scribbling's.  so there is your challenge.  speak to us oh economic oracle and give us your wisdom. Aw, I'm sorry Longy, I over-estimated  your capacity? Your not just truly 4R's inhibited, you are BIG TIME 4R'S INHIBITED! The total sum of your - Reading wRiting aRithmetic & compRehension is ZERO! Oh & btw, you still haven't answered any of the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE Economic issues, BUT that's not unusual, because you have NFI what is actually happening!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 7:03pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 6:24pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 6:14pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 5:22pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 3:38pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 3:12pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 1:46pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 12:42pm: so list them all here, right now. Actual suggestions and solution.  No one else has been able to find them in your scribbling's.  so there is your challenge.  speak to us oh economic oracle and give us your wisdom. Aw, I'm sorry Longy, I over-estimated  your capacity? Your not just truly 4R's inhibited, you are BIG TIME 4R'S INHIBITED! The total sum of your - Reading wRiting aRithmetic & compRehension is ZERO! Oh & btw, you still haven't answered any of the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE Economic issues, BUT that's not unusual, because you have NFI what is actually happening! and still no answers.  still no ideas.  still no suggestions. where are they depression_now? There's already MUCH MORE there than YOU can absorb, with your very limited 4R's capacity! Oh & btw, you still haven't answered any of the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE Economic issues, BUT that's not unusual, because you have NFI what is actually happening!    well you are the one, pinhead, claiming such insight and knowledge so where are your solutions? of course... wankers of your limited breeding and education can only COMPLAIN.  you never have any actual IDEAS. you are an empty windbag. no ideas, no thoughts, no use. As I said - 1) I have already put up, it is your very limited 4R's capacity that is YOUR PROBLEM! 2) You still haven't answered any of the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE Economic issues, BUT that's not unusual, because you have NFI what is actually happening!    3) SPIN & CALLING PEOPLE NAMES WON'T SOLVE ANYTHING LONGY, YOU MAY TRY DEALING WITH REALITY SOMETIME & you MAY start to get some insights? For example, why do you pretend that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally. You refer to the Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007. However, you disregard the facts that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND you disregard history which says that Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era! Reality Longy, when are you going to start living in it, instead of the past & your own head space? I don't know if you are obtuse, stubborn or both.  You are a bit like FD has become.  Make a lot of claims and thenb support none of them. You are an economic dinosaur with a prescription for Prozac.  your could depress a lottery winner. As I said - 1) I have already put up, it is your very limited 4R's capacity that is YOUR PROBLEM! 2) You still haven't answered any of the REAL & SUBSTANTIVE Economic issues, BUT that's not unusual, because you have NFI what is actually happening!    3) SPIN & CALLING PEOPLE NAMES WON'T SOLVE ANYTHING LONGY, YOU MAY TRY DEALING WITH REALITY SOMETIME & you MAY start to get some insights? Specifically, why do you pretend that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally. You refer to the Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007. However, you disregard the facts that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND you disregard history which says that Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era!

wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 2:53pm:

Debt crisis? Truth is, there isn't one     Date     August 17, 2013     The Age. The expression making a mountain out of a molehill could have been invented for the debate about government debt in Australia.      :-?     So the basic fact is this:  We hear debt is out of control and future generations will be burdened with paying it off. Rubbish.      :) When the secretaries of Treasury and the Department of Finance sign off on the independent Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook (PEFO) as reflecting their officers' best professional judgment on the budget, one thing they do is model projections for the next 10 years. The results are in startling contrast to debt alarmism. Pages 60 and 61 of the PEFO released this week illustrate two scenarios in the absence of policy changes. One accepts the 2013-14 budget assumptions by limiting real growth in payments to 2 per cent a year (which history suggests is a heroic assumption) and capping tax revenue at 23.7 per cent of gross domestic product (lower than all but one year of the period 2000-07). The other no-policy-change scenario allows rises in spending with demand and in taxes with growth in profits and incomes. What happens? In the first scenario, the underlying cash surplus grows rapidly beyond the forward estimates. ''Net debt is projected to return to zero in 2023-24.'' In the second scenario - in which ''spending grows in line with the demand for existing functions and if the taxation system is unchanged'' - payments growth rises to an average of 3.5 per cent a year and the tax take hits 25.5 per cent of GDP (exceeding the records of 2004-06). The result? ''Net debt would be slightly above zero in 2023-24.'' Such projections cannot be exact, but are more reliable than much of the public commentary on debt. One chart doing the rounds shows the proportion of debt accumulated by Australia from 2011 to 2014 as greater than for all OECD nations but Spain and Slovenia. Writing in The Australian Financial Review, former Howard government minister Alexander Downer cited this as proof the Rudd government has lost control of debt. What does the table really show? And how does Australia's debt truly compare? The first question to ask about any percentage change is this: what was the starting point? The chart purporting to show the ''facts'' on debt is a classic example of why this matters. Every other country on the chart has a debt that, relative to the size of their economies, is much bigger than Australia's. The apparently rapid growth in Australian debt is a result of its low starting point. As a simple illustration, which would you prefer: a 100 per cent increase in a $1 debt, or a 10 per cent increase in a $100 debt? The first will cost you $1, the second $10. No contest. Or consider two debtors. The figures are drawn from the OECD Outlook No. 93, published in June. One, let's call her Ms Australia, has gross debts equal to 33.8 per cent of national income by 2014, the other, Mr Greece, owes 189.2 per cent. But Mr Greece started in 2011 with a debt of 178.9 per cent and Australia began with 27.1 per cent. Voila! You have a chart that makes Australia's debt growth look much worse. But, again, which debt would you prefer to have? Government income is tied to the size and growth of the economy, usually expressed as gross domestic product. And when we convert the debt growth shown in the chart to GDP terms, the picture looks very different. The 2011-14 debt growth is as follows: Slovenia 23.9 per cent of GDP, Spain 26.4 per cent, the UK 12.6 per cent, Greece 10.3 per cent, total OECD 9.6 per cent and the United States 8.1 per cent. Australia's increase is 6.7 per cent. By 2014, every other country on the chart has a debt-to-GDP ratio between 1.25 and 5.6 times as big as Australia's. The chart's ''best'' performers, Germany and Switzerland, are cutting debt but, relative to GDP, still owe significantly more than Australia does. Commonwealth debt is equal to about 10 months' revenue - most mortgage holders can only dream of such a burden. The chart seems to have its origins in an article in The Australian Financial Review by economist and former Reserve Bank board member Warwick McKibbin. He presents data for all OECD nations and also notes Australia's gross government debt is the third-smallest, after Luxembourg and Estonia, and much lower than the rest. ''The problem is not that Australia currently has a debt problem,'' he acknowledges, but ''it has a problem with the nature of spending and taxation''. McKibbin's legitimate concern is that if current imbalances are not corrected and debt-based funding is not invested productively, we could develop a debt problem. So the basic fact, which is well documented, is this: Australian government debt is low and is not out of control. The picture looks even better when one realises the OECD figures are for general government debt. Other tiers of government owe about 40 per cent of our debt, so the Commonwealth's share equals 20 per cent of GDP. But wait, there's more. The OECD figures are for gross debt. As any borrower and any lender should know, debt is assessed against

Maqqa wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 2:56pm:

Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 4:15pm:

Is Debt Out Of Control In Australia? Simple question? Actually NO! The reality of THE CURRENT SITUATION is that NO DEBT IS NOT OUT OF CONTROL! However, given the basic Local & Global Economic Drivers, IT QUITE POSSIBLY COULD BE, GOING FORWARD! That said, the fact is that in the Real world, Economics has a time & a place for both Deficits & Surpluses. Normally, in modern Economics, it is a complicated world and it is certainly not as simple as "you must always run at a Budget Surplus", BUT "nor can you always run at a Deficit". Pretending that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally, is misleading. The Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007, disregards the fact that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND it disregards history which says that both Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt

cods wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 4:21pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 4:15pm: Is Debt Out Of Control In Australia? Simple question? Actually NO! The reality of THE CURRENT SITUATION is that NO DEBT IS NOT OUT OF CONTROL! However, given the basic Local & Global Economic Drivers, IT QUITE POSSIBLY COULD BE, GOING FORWARD! That said, the fact is that in the Real world, Economics has a time & a place for both Deficits & Surpluses. Normally, in modern Economics, it is a complicated world and it is certainly not as simple as "you must always run at a Budget Surplus", BUT "nor can you always run at a Deficit". Pretending that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally, is misleading. The Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007, disregards the fact that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND it disregards history which says that both Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt and if we did hit a massive BUMP with our economy... what then???.. will those we owe say .. thats OK Australia you dont have to pay us back?????????.. no we will still have to find it wont we... and again I ask you WHAT HAVE WE GOT TO SHOW FOR THIS MASSIVE DEBT...that we dont have concern ourselves about?????

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 7:13pm:

cods wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 4:21pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 4:15pm: Is Debt Out Of Control In Australia? Simple question? Actually NO! The reality of THE CURRENT SITUATION is that NO DEBT IS NOT OUT OF CONTROL! However, given the basic Local & Global Economic Drivers, IT QUITE POSSIBLY COULD BE, GOING FORWARD! That said, the fact is that in the Real world, Economics has a time & a place for both Deficits & Surpluses. Normally, in modern Economics, it is a complicated world and it is certainly not as simple as "you must always run at a Budget Surplus", BUT "nor can you always run at a Deficit". Pretending that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally, is misleading. The Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007, disregards the fact that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND it disregards history which says that both Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt and if we did hit a massive BUMP with our economy... what then???.. will those we owe say .. thats OK Australia you dont have to pay us back?????????.. no we will still have to find it wont we... and again I ask you WHAT HAVE WE GOT TO SHOW FOR THIS MASSIVE DEBT...that we dont have concern ourselves about????? Cods, Let me make a statement & pose a question, so YOU can think about an answer to your own question. We, both Australia & Globally, have just had a substantial "BUMP", as you put it, to the Global Economy, which has been working its way down from the weaker Economies (including Europe & the USA), who were the first to be hit, to the stronger Economies, such as China, OZ & a few others. My question is, WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD HAVE BEEN THE EFFECTS ON AUSTRALIA, IF STIMULUS MEASURES HAD NOT BEEN TAKEN (admittedly, some could have been implemented better, with time & hindsight) & OUR ECONOMY HAD BEEN LEFT TO MEANDER ON ITS OWN OR WORSE STILL, IF A GOVERNMENT HAD IMPLEMENTED AUSTERITY MEASURES? And, to avoid the likelihood of some obvious comments, from some, I have already indicated that Debt can not simply be allowed to escalate, out of control. I have also indicated that specific measures will be required to increase Productivity, that the Tax, Expenditure & the whole of government systems, will need a complete review, with some tax increases (including business) & some "entitlements" will have to  be reduced &/or done away with completely! Oh & btw, that BUMP in the Economy, commonly referred to as the GFC, is far from finished, it has a long way to run yet & it will become a much deeper Local & Global slump, before it is finally ready to finish!

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 8:00pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 4:15pm: Is Debt Out Of Control In Australia? Simple question? Actually NO! The reality of THE CURRENT SITUATION is that NO DEBT IS NOT OUT OF CONTROL! However, given the basic Local & Global Economic Drivers, IT QUITE POSSIBLY COULD BE, GOING FORWARD! That said, the fact is that in the Real world, Economics has a time & a place for both Deficits & Surpluses. Normally, in modern Economics, it is a complicated world and it is certainly not as simple as "you must always run at a Budget Surplus", BUT "nor can you always run at a Deficit". Pretending that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally, is misleading. The Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007, disregards the fact that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND it disregards history which says that both Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt so true to your usual from your answer is 'yes and No' idiot.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 9:17pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 8:00pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 4:15pm: Is Debt Out Of Control In Australia? Simple question? Actually NO! The reality of THE CURRENT SITUATION is that NO DEBT IS NOT OUT OF CONTROL! However, given the basic Local & Global Economic Drivers, IT QUITE POSSIBLY COULD BE, GOING FORWARD! That said, the fact is that in the Real world, Economics has a time & a place for both Deficits & Surpluses. Normally, in modern Economics, it is a complicated world and it is certainly not as simple as "you must always run at a Budget Surplus", BUT "nor can you always run at a Deficit". Pretending that Surpluses are the norm, when they are very clearly the exception, both in OZ & Globally, is misleading. The Liberal history of Surpluses, which the Libs did have during the Howard era from 1995-2007, disregards the fact that the 1995-2007 period co-incided with the greatest Global Economic boom of any era, as it was also the Peak Baby Boomer years AND it disregards history which says that both Debt & Deficits are part of the usual role of government & have been in most countries (as can be seen at the following website), for most of the modern era! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt so true to your usual from your answer is 'yes and No' idiot. The "truth" Longy? You & your SPIN wouldn't know the truth, IF IT BIT YOU ON YOUR ASS! I don't deal in spin, I deal only in Reality & Reality is not reside in your "head space"! Try answering one straight forward question - MUST &/or CAN, every year be a SURPLUS YEAR?

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 9:24pm:

Innocent bystander wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 8:03pm: You need to understand idiotic lefty logic here, the idiot lefty looks at his neighbour who owns his own house and has no debt and thinks what a fool, why don't you borrow money on your credit card and spend it all on useless sh#t that you don't need.  ;D FYI - I own my house, I have no ongoing Debt! I use credit cards, BUT pay them in full each month! I am not a Lefty, NOR am I a Righty, I am simply someone with over 40 years experience in the Finance Sector, who is a REALIST!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 9:49pm:

Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 2:56pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B Maqqa, Maqqa, Maqqa, What you fail to say, in your SPIN, is that most governments, both here & overseas, including most past Australian Liberal governments regularly run up Deficits & Debts, as part of the standard government modus operandi. The Howard Liberal government being one of the exceptions, albeit that they ran up Surpluses during the greatest Global Economic BOOM in modern history and whilst they did so, they should have done better, given those boom years! But, to give credit where due, as I have done previously, the Lib performance during those Peak Baby Boomer years, was better than 99% of what most overseas Politicians achieved! In addition, the current Labor crowd also took office as the worst Global GFC in at least 80 years was commencing and as such AUS-terity had to stop & Stimulus measures had to start, otherwise the outcomes between 2007-2013 would have been substantial worse! That is not to say that Labor did a great job, as they certainly made some errors!

percetpions only - I am happy to answer.

no, every year need not be a surplus.

17/8/13 20.59
Un-sustainability of a Government debt (Gross) level above 60-90% of a country’s GDP, is a level generally accepted by Economists.

Personally, I would have a great preference to keep the Gross Debt to GDP ratio UNDER 45%, as it can get very difficult to actually repay government Debt, except for exceptional circumstances, such as the Peak years of the Baby Boomer Boom!

The level of tolerable Government debt depends on a multitude of factors, such as -
1) The borrowing currency is also a major reserve currency! If it is, then it may be seen to reduce risk levels & increase the possibility of "Printing" more money, to assist in servicing the Debt issue? Some related issues are currently percolating in the USA.

2) Who will own the government Debt, Locals or Foreign sources? The larger the Foreign component, the more difficulties may be experienced?

3) The Likely level of interest rates that will be payable on the Government Debt, over the short, medium & longer term? Higher rates (particularly short to medium term) make higher Debt MORE difficult  to service, whereas Lower rates make Debt LESS difficult to service?

4) But, expected economic growth, is the most important factor!
Higher levels of expected growth, will increase the likelihood of higher Tax Revenues, thus possibly increasing the attractiveness of investing in that Government Debt & possibly lowering the rates payable?   
Lower levels of expected growth, will increase the likelihood of lower Tax Revenues, thus possibly decreasing the attractiveness of investing in that Government Debt & possibly increasing the rates payable?

Of course, these are government & Market REACTIONS TO THE REAL ECONOMY and that real Economy is now being driven by 3 major factors, each of which has or is, in the process of change course, compared to their positions, over the last 50-60 years in particular & those factors are -
1) Demographic Changes - Over the last 70 years or so, we have seen the largest Population explosion in human history, which is now Peaking, before going into actual reverse over the next 20-30 years.
The major effect here is that the rate of increase in DEMAND for all forms of Goods & Services skyrocketed between WW2, until the early part of this new century, BUT since then DEMAND has started to wane & the rate of increase in DEMAND has commenced to slow.
Over the next 20-30 years, DEMAND for all forms of Goods & Services will first level off & then commence to Decline and no amount of stimulus will change that basic fact!
2) Energy (Supply & Pricing) - This is one of 3 great enablers to the Demographic surge between 1945-2005 and the massive discoveries of Fossil Fuels (such as Oil, Coal & Gas), at very low Prices, assisted the massive Population growth over that period.
However, the rate of growth in Supply started to taper off in the late 1990's, became more evident in the first decade of the new century and the resultant lack of Supply/increasing Demand showed up in massive Price hikes, with Oil going from $10 a barrel in 1999, to around $148 a barrel in 2008.
The major effect here, is that Fossil Fuels & Oil in particular are involved in almost every Product & Service known to humanity AND the increasing Prices of Fossil Fuels are driving Price hikes across the board, with the Publics Disposable income taking a substantial hit, over the last decade or so AND THAT WILL CONTINUE, AS THERE IS NO VIABLE ENERGY ALTERNATIVE THAT CAN DELIVER BOTH SUFFICIENT VOLUME & THE RIGHT PRICE!
Of course, the consumer hit to their hip pocket, MUST & IS, BEING REFLECTED BY A DECLINE IN DEMAND!

By the way, the other 2 great enablers are -
Climate - We have had a goldilocks climate for several hundred years, which has greatly assisted in accommodating the additional Population, primarily by way of providing sufficient Food & Fresh Water.
Technology - Human Technology has exploded, particularly over the last 100-200 years and that has provided an enormous boost in Productivity, again assisting the Population explosion in a myriad of ways.
That said, the goldilocks climate is now in the process of ending, whether it be natural or human assisted is still being argued out, although I would agree there is a degree of human cause involved.
Which leaves us with Technology and as I have said previously, Technology may again ride over the hill to our combined rescue, BUT AGAIN I WOULD COUNCIL AGAINST RELYING ON LAST MINUTE, OUT OF THE BLUE CAVALRY CHARGE BY THE TECHNOLOGY BRIGADE, AS IT IS SIMPLY NOT GOOD PUBLIC POLICY!

No, IF we want a future for ourselves, our children & our children's children, then we will have to start making some really tough decisions & we will have to start NOW!

We will need -
A complete review of Government Taxes, Expenditure and all government Policies.
Specific Tax increases & lower Expenditure & an emphasis on Productivity.
Co-operation across all Political parties, for the longer term benefit of all Australians.
AND, all of the above, will also need to take place Globally.

Can this & much more be done? The answer is YES!
Will it be done? On that, the realist in me, is nowhere near as confident AND the flow on effects from the Demographic & Energy factors, will place Growth in particular extremely difficult and return to past Economics absolutely impossible!

In any event, knowledge is everything and at least if you are armed with what is really going on, then your chances are better of getting better outcomes.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 18^th, 2013 at 4:54pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 18th, 2013 at 3:57pm: Facts (provided by the Australian Treasury) 1. Gross debt in Australia has increased by 350% in the 6 years of ALP Government. 2. The projected surplus of A$1.5bn for 2013 blew out to be A30.1bn deficit. 3. The performance of the Government in its second term to its forecasts amounted to misses of A$109bn. 4. Business confidence in Australia had hit a low of 8 months following the write downs of its projected forecasts in Aug 2013. 5. The gross debt of Australia in 2007 delivered by the outgoing Howard Government was $58,284,000,000. The debt at June 2013 is A$264,976,000,000. An increase of A$206.7bn..... Facts. Yep, ok they are fair statements, BUT the real underlying issue is - Q) Why did the government take those actions & putting aside the fact that some errors were certainly made, in terms of implementation, were the basics of the actions correct in implementing a stimulus approach? A) That a reasonable sized stimulation was the correct action, particularly given the size of the GFC and the GFC was the basic reason for the action, as the costs to the OZ Economy would have reflected great damage, IF action was not taken! That is not to say that there is an open & endless opportunity for ongoing Stimuli, nor is there an excuse to continue driving the Debt to GDP ratio higher, particularly as it won't now have the same or similar desirable outcomes.    Oh & btw, Business confidence will continue to fall, whether the Liberals or Labor win this election, although I think the Libs are likely narrow winners, as the Local & Global Economy continues to slow over the period ahead! Part of my reasoning for that statement is at - http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376715205/29#29

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 18^th, 2013 at 5:48pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 18th, 2013 at 5:01pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 18th, 2013 at 2:09pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 10:59pm: No, IF we want a future for ourselves, our children & our children's children, then we will have to start making some really tough decisions & we will have to start NOW! We will need - A complete review of Government Taxes, Expenditure and all government Policies. Specific Tax increases & lower Expenditure & an emphasis on Productivity. Co-operation across all Political parties, for the longer term benefit of all Australians. AND, all of the above, will also need to take place Globally. Can this & much more be done? The answer is YES! Will it be done? On that, the realist in me, is nowhere near as confident AND the flow on effects from the Demographic & Energy factors, will place Growth in particular extremely difficult and return to past Economics absolutely impossible! In any event, knowledge is everything and at least if you are armed with what is really going on, then your chances are better of getting better outcomes. So, NO DISAGREEMENT from the usual suspects, I take it therefore that they agree with the above & the rest of what I said in my post! so pinhead... when WE say there needs to be a reduction in expenditure and an increase in some taxes we are morons but when YOU say it, it is okay?  This is why you are routinely ignored: because when you can finally get a pseudo solution out of you it is the same as what we are saying but without the convoluted reasoning. A few observations Longy - 1) The Liberal DNA, particularly recently, is that Expenditure reductions simply become "across the board AUS-terity programs", instead of specific & targeted expenditure cuts. 2) Even YOU, could claim that the Election promise of reducing Corporate tax levels is an increase, IT'S A DECREASE IN TAX, NOT AN INCREASE, you moron!    Mind , you're not on your lonesome, with Labor promising - $Billions for a car industry, which will eventually disappear up its own ass! Tax cuts for Northern Australia, which will achieve absolutely nothing, due to changing circumstances! As I have said many times, I am not offering "solutions", which will restore the status quo. Far from it, all I am doing is highlighting what is actually happening, so some people can be forearmed with that knowledge & perhaps get better outcomes, because of that knowledge! You are the moron, who thinks nothing has, nor will it change? But you're not on your lonesome, as both Labor & Liberals are also living in the past and all of you assume the status quo will return, WHICH SIMPLY WILL NOT HAPPEN! But, congratulations are in order, as it seems your 4R's failed again, with your zero comprehension of what I wrote at - http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376715205/29#29 & http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376715205/45#45 &  More, much more!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 18^th, 2013 at 8:03pm:

stryder wrote on Aug 18th, 2013 at 7:51pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 18th, 2013 at 7:47pm: stryder wrote on Aug 18th, 2013 at 7:25pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 18th, 2013 at 7:18pm: What are your thoughts, on the Economic Basics, Stryder? Well were do you like start perceptions. debt ? economic growth ? unemployment ? take your pick Well, they can all be looked at separately, BUT they are also all connected, so take your pick, one at at time or  the combination I dont have your varied knowledge on Economics, Im just a simpleton when it comes to it. I dont think i can provide you with a satisfying challenge,  :) This is not about the challenge, we are ALL in this, up to our eyeballs, so everyone is entitled to their input and it could just produce the X factors that may be missing! I am simply of the opinion that I have identified some unique issues, which are impacting us & need to be addressed. Unlike a few others here, who  should remain un-named (like Longy & Maqqa), who think they "know it all", I do not & I am happy if many others enter the discussion & impart their own opinions!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 19^th, 2013 at 11:17am:

stryder wrote on Aug 18th, 2013 at 8:07pm: The liberals have stated there case that since government revenues are falling that we need to look at what we are spending and make some serious cuts Labor on the other hand dont think so, they think whatever debt we are piling, we can handle it, lets keep spending like a teenager with gold credit card. Whos right, whos wrong ???? Perceptions Sorry, for the delay in responding! Things aren't quite that straight forward, BUT in the past both arguments have been correct, given the right point in the Economic cycle and IF the timing was correct then both/either would have had a fair chance of the Economy responding in the desired way! However, for most of the duration of the modern Economic era both types of Economic theories (Austrian & Keynesian) have always had favorable Economic conditions, as far as the major drivers were concerned. THOSE ECONOMIC DRIVERS BEING DEMOGRAPHICS, ENERGY, TECHNOLOGY & A GOLDILOCKS CLIMATE, WITH A NET RESULT BEING THAT DEMAND STEADILY INCREASED & ACTED AS A BACKDROP, WHICH WOULD EVENTUALLY GET THE ECONOMY BACK ON GROWTH, NO MATTER WHAT THE POLITICIANS, ECONOMISTS & CENTRAL BANKERS DID OR DID NOT DO! .    So eventually, at most times during the modern Economic era, the Politicians (both Labor or Liberal) could claim they had been RIGHT and their policies had been proven successful. IN TRUTH, ON MOST OCCASIONS, IT WAS SIMPLE THE FAVORABLE MACRO ECONOMIC CONDITIONS REASSERTING THEIR INFLUENCE, WHICH EVENTUALLY GOT GROWTH GOING AGAIN! Now, those favorable Macro Economic conditions have leveled off and at least 3 of them are about to go into reverse. So, what was true, is no longer true AND WE WILL NOW FIND THAT NEITHER THE LIBERAL OR THE LABOR BASIC THEORIES WILL RETURN ECONOMIC GROWTH & THEREFORE THE STATUS QUO, "TO NORMAL", AS THOSE SAME MACRO ECONOMIC DRIVERS WILL PREVENT DEMAND FROM RETURNING, NO MATTER WHAT ACTIONS ARE TAKEN. So, at this point in time, BOTH LABOR & LIBERAL ARE WRONG! It is very likely, that in the short to medium term, we (Locally & Globally) will find the going pretty tough, BUT IF the pain is shared fairly by all, then the Economy MAY recover, BUT it will take a considerable amount of time! However, IF the usual suspects try to get better outcomes for themselves & their own "constituents" & there is no similar Global actions, particularly to raise Productivity, THEN ANY RECOVERY WILL BE A LOT LONGER IN COMING, IF INDEED IT DOES ARRIVE! Not very nice reading, I know, BUT SOMETIMES REALITY JUST ISN'T PLEASANT, AS I'M SURE MANY OF THOSE WHO WENT THRU THE GREAT DEPRESSION WOULD AGREE!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 4:04pm:

crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 1:13pm:

percetpions only - I am happy to answer. no, every year need not be a surplus.

at times, we have to have surpuses and every deficit should be inspected carefully.
We cannot have a deficit every year.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 1:35pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 1:13pm: percetpions only - I am happy to answer. no, every year need not be a surplus. at times, we have to have surpuses and every deficit should be inspected carefully. We cannot have a deficit every year.

Sorry Sprinty, I missed your first post, as I was probably too busy, CUTTING & PASTING?!

I agree, we do not need, nor could we get, even in "normal" times, a Deficit every year, nor do we need, nor could we get a Surplus every year!

I also agree, that THERE ARE TIMES, during the "normal" Economic cycle, WHEN SURPLUSES &/OR DEFICIT'S ARE ABSOLUTELY THE CORRECT THING, AT ABSOLUTELY THE RIGHT TIME & THAT IT IS ALWAYS TIME FOR DUE PROCESS & TO ENSURE VALUE FOR MONEY IN OUTCOMES!

That said, I must finally add that these are "Not normal times", for reasons I have previously outlined and after building up towards these once in history circumstances for possibly up to 80 years, WE SHOULD NOT, CAN NOT, EXPECT THINGS TO RETURN TO THE STATUS QUO QUICKLY. In fact, a return to the Economic status quo,  particularly of the last 50-60 years, is very, very unlikely!

Actually, events will likely unfold over quite some time and the outcome/s will need to be equally & fairly shared OR the outcomes will likely be worse than they may otherwise have been!

Which means, both major party's (in OZ) will have to actually learn to co-operate with each other, IF we are to have any sort of acceptable outcome & that situation must also be repeated Globally!

All of which means, THE TIME/S FOR SPIN IS DEAD & THE TIME/S FOR REALITY MUST START NOW!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2013 at 10:39am:

John S wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 21st, 2013 at 11:12pm: road building was THE STIMULUS project used to end the great depression.  you get dumber the more you post. learn a bit of history longy it wasn't road building that was used to end the great depression it was the Second World War Correct, WW2 AND A MASSIVE BABY BOOM THAT FOLLOWED!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2013 at 11:02am:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:50am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:39am: John S wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 21st, 2013 at 11:12pm: road building was THE STIMULUS project used to end the great depression.  you get dumber the more you post. learn a bit of history longy it wasn't road building that was used to end the great depression it was the Second World War Correct, WW2 AND A MASSIVE BABY BOOM THAT FOLLOWED! you are both wrong.  while the war did pull the world out of the depression for good what began the process was American construction of roads - mainly cement - as a stimulus program to get the masses of unemployed working again. try reading some history people. http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/historical/images/djia1900s.png The above chart disagrees with you, Longy! But, there's nothing unusual about that, as you still have NFI! The act is the US & Global Economy was heading down the toilet again, until the largest "stimulus program ever seen got underway, due to WW2!

http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/historical/images/djia1900s.png

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2013 at 11:24am:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 11:12am: John S wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:58am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:50am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:39am: John S wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 21st, 2013 at 11:12pm: road building was THE STIMULUS project used to end the great depression.  you get dumber the more you post. learn a bit of history longy it wasn't road building that was used to end the great depression it was the Second World War Correct, WW2 AND A MASSIVE BABY BOOM THAT FOLLOWED! you are both wrong.  while the war did pull the world out of the depression for good what began the process was American construction of roads - mainly cement - as a stimulus program to get the masses of unemployed working again. try reading some history people. the only reason that roads were built was for the war effort nothing more nothing less the road building project started 5 years BEFORE WW2 and 7 years  before USA entered the war. road building is THET standard stimulus package which of course our stupid labor govt didn't go with. As I have said previously Longy, YOU HAVE NFI! That is a self defeating argument! You are saying that those packages, which "saved" the Economy, started around 1934-1936, BUT the Economy was on the ropes again, as indicated by the share market, from around 1937-1942, before the massive WW2 stimulus started having its impact around 1942.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 22^nd, 2013 at 5:50pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 11:41am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 11:24am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 11:12am: John S wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:58am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:50am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:39am: John S wrote on Aug 22nd, 2013 at 10:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 21st, 2013 at 11:12pm: road building was THE STIMULUS project used to end the great depression.  you get dumber the more you post. learn a bit of history longy it wasn't road building that was used to end the great depression it was the Second World War Correct, WW2 AND A MASSIVE BABY BOOM THAT FOLLOWED! you are both wrong.  while the war did pull the world out of the depression for good what began the process was American construction of roads - mainly cement - as a stimulus program to get the masses of unemployed working again. try reading some history people. the only reason that roads were built was for the war effort nothing more nothing less the road building project started 5 years BEFORE WW2 and 7 years  before USA entered the war. road building is THET standard stimulus package which of course our stupid labor govt didn't go with. As I have said previously Longy, YOU HAVE NFI! That is a self defeating argument! You are saying that those packages, which "saved" the Economy, started around 1934-1936, BUT the Economy was on the ropes again, as indicated by the share market, from around 1937-1942, before the massive WW2 stimulus started having its impact around 1942. read some economics books will you just for once??  the road-building stimulus is credited with being the initiative that started the process of dragging the USA out of the intractable depression.  On one hand you support stimulus - as long as it is your version of it of course - but reject historical examples of it that were successful. you are one complex, twisted and dopy drongo. " Stock market returns are a leading indicator: the stock market usually begins to decline before the economy as a whole declines and usually begins to improve before the general economy begins to recover from a slump." As already stated, the US DOW had started to slump again around 1937 & by 1942 it had lost over 50% of its value. In June 1937, the Roosevelt administration cut spending and increased taxation in an attempt to balance the federal budget. The American economy then took a sharp downturn - Industrial production fell almost 30 per cent within a few months and production of durable goods fell even faster. Unemployment jumped from 14.3% in 1937 to 19.0% in 1938. Manufacturing output fell by 37% from the 1937 peak and was back to 1934 levels. I have said, on numerous occasions, that both Austrian & Keynesian Economic fixes have often be successful in the past & I say it again now, BUT neither will work now. However, the Great Depression was another example, similar to the current GFC, where both Austrian & Keynesian Economic fixes did not work, as intended! First came the stimulus, which were partially effective, but drove up Debt, then came the Expenditure cuts & the Economy fell into another huge hole. As indicated, by one of the best Economic indicators, THE SHARE MARKET, the US Economy went down hill between 1937-1942 and the following 2 charts ARE THE REASON FOR THE US ECONOMY'S SURGE AGAIN, AS FROM 1942 - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/Publicly_Held_Federal_Debt_1790-2009.png/800px-Publicly_Held_Federal_Debt_1790-2009.png http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3F1m_4DpIq0/Ubd8wJlUYlI/AAAAAAAAACA/bOvfvYTTqEk/s400/DemographicsandAmerica.blogspot.com-10year-Population-Growth-Rates-1900-2010.jpg I don't expect that you will see the similarities Longy, BUT there will be others who will! The, as now, Stimuli's were applied, Expenditure cuts (Aus-terity) is most likely on its way & Birthrates/Population Growth had crashed prior to the Economic crash. Btw, the US Debt to GDP raio is now over 100%. There are 2 BIG DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE GREAT DEPRESSION & NOW - 1) ANOTHER BABY BOOM IS IMPOSSIBLE, AS WE ARE ALREADY BEYOND WHAT THE PLANET CAN SUSTAIN, PARTICULARLY IN FOOD, WATER & ENERGY! 2) ANOTHER WAR NOW, WOULD COMPLETELY DECIMATE HUMANITY, BECAUSE OUR TECHNOLOGY "HAS COME SO FAR"! Btw Longy, You still have NFI!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/Publicly_Held_Federal_Debt_1790-2009.png/800px-Publicly_Held_Federal_Debt_1790-2009.png
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3F1m_4DpIq0/Ubd8wJlUYlI/AAAAAAAAACA/bOvfvYTTqEk/s400/DemographicsandAmerica.blogspot.com-10year-Population-Growth-Rates-1900-2010.jpg

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2013 at 11:21am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 23rd, 2013 at 10:45am: The Libs will do exactly the same as Labor - same deficit, same mistakes, same revenue forecasts, same budget tricks and spin. You are correct, in so far as there are/will be quite a few similarities, for both Labor & Liberal, including - Both have Similar SPIN tactics! They are both Truth inhibited! Both would have a "once in history", set of negative Global Economic Drivers, in the years ahead! Neither will be able to restore the Economic status quo, via the usual Keynesian or Austrian solutions! It is likely that both would continue to run Deficits & mounting Debt OR run the risk of dramatically worsening the Economic outcome!  Neither has any earthly idea, what is really happening, nor do they really want to know! Neither has the guts to implement change/s that would upset their supporters & lessen their election prospects, including getting rid of things such as Baby Bonuses, Local Councils & lowering Taxes! That said, we (the Public) must take some responsibility, both here & overseas, for allowing this situation to develop, over a considerable amount of time. We need to develop some "intestinal fortitude" of our own! We need to stop simply following the past & our own "beliefs/prejudices"!! We need to look to what is actually happening now, what are the likely future consequences/outcomes of the actions/inactions that we are now allowing/enforcing on our Pollies AND WE NEED TO START THE CHANGE PROCESS, NOW!!!    I would suggest that start be made, BY KICKING OUT EVERY INCUMBENT & THEREBY SENDING THE ESTABLISHMENT A MESSAGE, THAT CHANGE MUST START NOW!

# wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2013 at 11:32am:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 23rd, 2013 at 11:21am: Karnal wrote on Aug 23rd, 2013 at 10:45am: The Libs will do exactly the same as Labor - same deficit, same mistakes, same revenue forecasts, same budget tricks and spin. You are correct, in so far as there are/will be quite a few similarities, for both Labor & Liberal, including - Both have Similar SPIN tactics! They are both Truth inhibited! Both would have a "once in history", set of negative Global Economic Drivers, in the years ahead! Neither will be able to restore the Economic status quo, via the usual Keynesian or Austrian solutions! It is likely that both would continue to run Deficits & mounting Debt OR run the risk of dramatically worsening the Economic outcome!  Neither has any earthly idea, what is really happening, nor do they really want to know! Neither has the guts to implement change/s that would upset their supporters & lessen their election prospects, including getting rid of things such as Baby Bonuses, Local Councils & lowering Taxes! That said, we (the Public) must take some responsibility, both here & overseas, for allowing this situation to develop, over a considerable amount of time. We need to develop some "intestinal fortitude" of our own! We need to stop simply following the past & our own "beliefs/prejudices"!! We need to look to what is actually happening now, what are the likely future consequences/outcomes of the actions/inactions that we are now allowing/enforcing on our Pollies AND WE NEED TO START THE CHANGE PROCESS, NOW!!!    I would suggest that start be made, BY KICKING OUT EVERY INCUMBENT & THEREBY SENDING THE ESTABLISHMENT A MESSAGE, THAT CHANGE MUST START NOW! Agreed. Unfortunately politicians, aided and abetted by media, have become far too adept at manipulating the herd. The herd decides who will govern. It seems we're headed for a Murdoch government.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 23^rd, 2013 at 6:23pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 23rd, 2013 at 5:06pm: Karnal wrote on Aug 23rd, 2013 at 12:00pm: red baron wrote on Aug 23rd, 2013 at 11:38am: Do you call borrowing 100 million dollars a day from the Chinese a good way to go. The only thing with what is now a 300 billion dollar debt to the Chinese that it will have to be re paid. I don't see any sign of that on the horizon, what I see is Labor borrowing 100 million dollars a day. Anyone care to refute that? Anyone care to give proof that the money is being repaid? Bit hard when we are still borrowing at that level. Ever had a home loan, Red? Or have you always relied on the generosity of Air Force Housing? Guess how much Australia borrowed to fight the chows over in Nam. Guess how much Australia borrowed to get out of the Depression and fight the Japs up in New Guinea. We're not fighting slopes anymore, son. We're fighting to stay out of recession. This is the challenge: raise taxes or borrow more money. Same for Labor, same for the Libs. The Libs are prepared to hock the good China to pay working mums' wages to go off and have kids. You think they'll cut back the debt? You're dreaming. Every major developed economy in the world has debt, as do most developing countries. Out of all of them, Australia has one of the lowest levels of debt in the world - at the last count, just behind Estonia. Run a deficit, or raise taxes - that's the only choice. My money's on a tax hike before long - no matter which party gets in. Back in the 60s, the Libs told us that if we fought the commies over there, we wouldn't have to fight them on our home ground. Now, in 2013, the Libs are more red than Ho Chi Minh. What a waste of a war that one was. We should have stuck to fighting them over here. What you typically refuse to acknowledge however is that the RATE OF INCREASE in debt in Australia is the third highest in the world.  now tell me again why the words best economy needs to be borrowing faster than virtually every other country? What you typically refuse to acknowledge, is that YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF BASIC AND PARTICULARLY CURRENT ECONOMICS IS QUITE LIMITED, Longy! However, that doesn't stop you from expressing your "beliefs", until you are alerted to facts which interrupt your faith in your beliefs and then you just disappear

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 11:51am:

300 Tons of Fukushima Nuclear Waste Pouring Into Ocean Every Day Officials in Japan hid the fact that the Fukushima nuclear plant has been pouring hundreds of tons of nuclear waste water into the ocean every day and that a containment barrier has been breached. Highly radioactive water from Japan’s crippled Fukushima nuclear plant is pouring out at a rate of 300 tonnes a day, officials said on Wednesday, as Prime Minister Shinzo Abe ordered the government to step in and help in the clean-up. The revelation amounted to an acknowledgement that plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co (Tepco) has yet to come to grips with the scale of the catastrophe, 2 1/2 years after the plant was hit by a huge earthquake and tsunami. Tepco only recently admitted water had leaked at all. As early as January this year, Tepco found fish contaminated with high levels of radiation inside a port at the plant. Local fishermen and independent researchers had already suspected a leak of radioactive water, but Tepco denied the claims. Tatsuya Shinkawa, a director in METI’s Nuclear Accident Response Office, told reporters the government believed water had been leaking for two years, but Yoneyama told Reuters it was unclear how long the water had been leaking at the current rate. Shinkawa described the water as “highly” contaminated. Tepco and the industry ministry have been working since May on a proposal to freeze the soil to prevent groundwater from leaking into the reactor buildings. According to AFP, TEPCO estimates between 20 trillion and 40 trillion becquerels of radioactive tritium have spilled into the ocean. UPI explains a becquerel is a unit of radioactivity, “the quantity of radioactive material in which one nucleus decays per second.” TEPCO long denied radioactive water had been leaking into the ocean, the AP notes, despite reports that biologists had found traces of radioactive cesium in fish. The operator eventually admitted to both the leak and having postponed acknowledgment the crisis. There is no credibility from TEPCO or the Japanese government on the extent of the real disaster, its effects, the ultimate cleanup costs, or how many years fish in the area will be contaminated. In addition, contaminated fish may turn up anywhere within their normal swimming range with obvious implications. Link - http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/08/mike-mish-shedlock/fukushima-cover-up-fails/ =============================== We are in the Energy Business & Fossil Fuels will last FOREVER! Yeah Right? We Politicians & the Energy Industry have Public Safety, Climate Change & LOWER COSTS, as our Prime concerns! Yeah Right? Government's don't spy on their own Public! Yeah Right? Government's have the Public's best, long term interests are heart! Yeah Right? I'm a Politician, you can Trust me, I tell the Truth! Yeah Right? My name is Tony/Kevin & the Liberal/Labor party will exponentially deliver lower taxes, lower Debt & more jobs! Yeah Right? The fact is that Government/s & Politicians (from all Party's, in Japan, here in OZ & around the world) and Big Business (Energy company's in particular) and let's not leave out the unions, all have something in common, THEY ARE SEVERELY TRUTH INHIBITED and biased towards their own self interest & that of their own supporters! It's time, to start sending a few messages & to start off, I suggest voting out every incumbent, at the upcoming OZ Federal Election!

personally I prefer to have both sides on the same page...



we have seen what happens when someone comes in and undoes something that was working perfectly... the pacific solution.. just to win a few votes and make him look like Saint Kev....look what we have.????..

thanks a lot.. to all those that dislike parties coming to agreements... we have had nothing.. but negative tony for 6 loooong years...even though heaps of legislation went through... ::) ::).. must have been on his day off...

lets be honest here...it isnt good for any country to have a completely divided govt and opposition...unless your religious nuts..and then look what happens... >:(

cods wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 4:32pm:

personally I prefer to have both sides on the same page... we have seen what happens when someone comes in and undoes something that was working perfectly... the pacific solution.. just to win a few votes and make him look like Saint Kev....look what we have.????.. thanks a lot.. to all those that dislike parties coming to agreements... we have had nothing.. but negative tony for 6 loooong years...even though heaps of legislation went through... ::) ::).. must have been on his day off... lets be honest here...it isnt good for any country to have a completely divided govt and opposition...unless your religious nuts..and then look what happens... >:(

Correct, Cods! But, they also need to b on the "correct page"!

As I put it to Sprinty -
Actually, events will likely unfold over quite some time and the outcome/s will need to be equally & fairly shared OR the outcomes will likely be worse than they may otherwise have been!

Which means, both major party's (in OZ) will have to actually learn to co-operate with each other, IF we are to have any sort of acceptable outcome & that situation must also be repeated Globally!

All of which means, THE TIME/S FOR SPIN IS DEAD & THE TIME/S FOR REALITY MUST START NOW! 

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:30pm:

Oh & for those, on both the Left & Right of Politics, who would complain of my bias, can I refer you to take the following ABC VoteCompass test & see where your results lead. http://www.abc.net.au/votecompass/ Whilst this sort of ting can be subjective, my answers resulted in me being - 1) Nearly in the centre of the middle target & very slightly on the Social Liberalism side and right in the middle between the Economic Left & Right. 2) My supposed agreement with the parties, according to Vote Compass, was - Labor - 54% Liberal -51% Greens - 44%

Maqqa wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 12:34pm:

So when negativity is evident - PN loves to drag both LIBs and ALP into the same boat But when positivity abounds for the LIBs - it seems PN is silent But not so silent when the ALP positivity Don't pretend you are neutral when your right eye is firmly shut Try again PN

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 1:58pm:

Maqqa wrote on Aug 11th, 2013 at 12:34pm: So when negativity is evident - PN loves to drag both LIBs and ALP into the same boat But when positivity abounds for the LIBs - it seems PN is silent But not so silent when the ALP positivity Don't pretend you are neutral when your right eye is firmly shut Try again PN As usual Maqqa, your SPIN exceeds reality! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375798381/43#43 If I agree with some of what you say, does not mean I agree with everything, nor does it make me a friend! Equally, if I disagree with some of what you say, that does not mean I disagree with everything, nor does it make me an enemy! In fact, the reason I hit the middle of the Vote Compass chart, wasn't that I am a fence sitter, IT IS BECAUSE I RECOGNIZE THAT THE WHOLE POLITICAL & ECONOMIC SYSTEM IS NOW NOT RECOGNIZING REALITY!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 2:35pm:

cods wrote on Aug 11th, 2013 at 12:35pm: so in the perfect world you envisage.. who do you suggest we emulate?.. assuming of course there is such a govt out there without all those dastardly characteristics you list.. self interest etc..???? I am sure you have somewhere in mind... :D Do you really think there is a Politician/Political Party that doesn't fit those characteristics? The world has never been "perfect" Cods, NEVER! And, why would you need to emulate anyone or any Political party? Why can't you (WE)  make up our own minds, based on FACTS & our own interpretation of those facts?

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 2:50pm:

Maqqa wrote on Aug 11th, 2013 at 2:39pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 11th, 2013 at 1:58pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 11th, 2013 at 12:34pm: So when negativity is evident - PN loves to drag both LIBs and ALP into the same boat But when positivity abounds for the LIBs - it seems PN is silent But not so silent when the ALP positivity Don't pretend you are neutral when your right eye is firmly shut Try again PN As usual Maqqa, your SPIN exceeds reality! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375798381/43#43 If I agree with some of what you say, does not mean I agree with everything, nor does it make me a friend! Equally, if I disagree with some of what you say, that does not mean I disagree with everything, nor does it make me an enemy! In fact, the reason I hit the middle of the Vote Compass chart, wasn't that I am a fence sitter, IT IS BECAUSE I RECOGNIZE THAT THE WHOLE POLITICAL & ECONOMIC SYSTEM IS NOW NOT RECOGNIZING REALITY! Fairly easy to "hit the middle" of the voting compass so that's no proof of your self proclaim neutrality This is not about "agreeing" with what I said It's always about presenting your argument succinctly despite your political leaning Well, there is certainly no mistaking your Political Leaning, as you do put it succinctly! However, your arguments reasoning is normally far from being succinct or reasoned! As for you saying I am being or hitting "middle of the road", I have already said that I am not a fence sitter, I most likely got that allocation on the Vote Compass chart because I RECOGNIZE THAT THE WHOLE POLITICAL & ECONOMIC SYSTEM IS NOW NOT RECOGNIZING REALITY and that change is desperately needed system wide!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 11^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

Maqqa wrote on Aug 11th, 2013 at 2:58pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 11th, 2013 at 2:50pm: Well, there is certainly no mistaking your Political Leaning, as you do put it succinctly! However, your arguments reasoning is normally far from being succinct or reasoned! As for you saying I am being or hitting "middle of the road", I have already said that I am not a fence sitter, I most likely got that allocation on the Vote Compass chart because I RECOGNIZE THAT THE WHOLE POLITICAL & ECONOMIC SYSTEM IS NOW NOT RECOGNIZING REALITY and that change is desperately needed system wide! I reflect the opposition I come up against You've not presented anything that is worth debating simply because you ignore facts and/or do not understand simple economic and/or accounting concept You are a straight reflection of the Liberal party! The simple Economic concepts you refer to, are simply a reflection of the past, they no longer have current &or future credibilty, as will be clearly on display Locally & Globally, over the years ahead! As for debating, you do not debate facts, such as what I repeatedly post, because you know it isn't a discussion you have any chance of winning, such as some of the issues raised in the following & related posts! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375798381/43#43

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 9:09pm:

stryder wrote on Aug 12th, 2013 at 7:46pm: Quote: Maqqa surrenders & admits, she has zero knowledge about Economics, particularly on current & future Economic issues, just like both Abbott/Liberals & Rudd/Labor! Perceptions now I take it that youre an expert, you know economic stuff do you? Most Expert's are best referred to, as follows - 'ex' is a has been, 'spurt' is a drip under pressure. I have a fair understanding of what is currently influencing Local & Global Economics, much of which is once in history. Certainly, my understanding is much greater than Maqqa's and indeed most of the so called "Economic ExSpurts, including those Labor & Liberal so called ExSpurts!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:25pm:

Talking of ExSpurts, I see a great deal of commentary, now that the Federal election has been called & is under way, about the outcome of this election. Many, if not most see the outcome in terms of their own Liberal/Labor leanings, resulting in either a Liberal or Labor win. Personally, I have said for some time, that I see a likely Liberal win, mainly due to Labor having been in power for some time, that the OZ Economy is in trouble, the Public will look for someone to make things better (like it was) and therefore sufficient will turn to the Libs, so that the Libs can form a government. However, it is now unlikely that there will be a landslide, which was possible not too long ago, unless some LARGE STUFF UP arrives, too complicate issues. So, the likelihood is a relatively small  victory, BUT still for the Liberals. Will that solve everyone's perceived problems, particularly Economic ones? REGRETTABLY, THE ANSWER IS NO! At least no, not very likely! The facts would strongly suggest that the incoming Liberal government would revert to "their past DNA" and impose an across the board AUS-terity program, which would most likely have worked at almost any other time in modern history & eventually the Economy would have bounced back, due to "normal factors". However, at this moment in history, there are once in history factors which are impacting the Local & Global Economy AND NOW, AN ACROSS THE BOARD AUS-TERITY PROGRAM WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG THING, AT ABSOLUTELY THE WRONG TIME! I would suggest, a good place for the winners of this election (likely Liberals) to START after the election, would be a SYSTEM WIDE REVIEW, with the Henry Tax Review as a basis, BUT the review must not be purely on the Tax system, IT MUST BE A WHOLE OF GOVERNMENT REVIEW, WITH NOTHING BEING OFF LIMITS & ALL POLLIES MUST BEAR IN MIND AT ALL TIMES THAT THE BASIC AIM IS THE BEST,  LONG TERM INTERESTS OF ALL AUSTRALIANS, not their own short term interests & those of their supporters!  So, to the OZ Public, I wish us the best future possible & to all of the Pollies, it's not about you!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 8:03pm:

Labor MPs 'warned not to criticise Tony Abbott for saying his candidate has sex appeal' http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/special-features/labor-mps-8216warned-not-to-criticise-tony-abbott-for-saying-his-candidate-has-sex-appeal8217/story-fnho52jp-1226696398223 =============================== I would think there are more substantive issues about, for our Pollies to get into & comment on! Oh & btw, PLEASE or as Maqqa would say FFS, can all Pollies STOP repeating words for additional emphasis, it is absolutely boring!!!

Poll added!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 24^th, 2013 at 9:11pm:

Notwithstanding the inevitable, usual SPIN, put up by Politicians of all sorts, we are now facing a once in history set of Economic Drivers, which are combining to slowly strangle Local & Global Economics. That said, our local Politicians, from both major Party's, are pretending that all is "normal" and that they can & will fix all our Economic ills, by using their "normal" Economic fixes. Well, as is a well known fact, POLITICIANS (ALL OF THEM) TELL PORKIES! The fact is that none of the Politicians can or will "fix what is afflicting the Economy"! I hear the usual SPIN statements - 1) We can/will fix the Economy, by getting the Budget back into Surplus (Austrian Economics). 2)  We can/will fix the Economy, by Stimulating Economic Growth (Keynesian Economics). These "fixes", in general terms, are tried & tested standard Economics basics AND AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME IN THE ECONOMIC CYCLE THEY HAVE BEEN USED & THEY HAVE USUALLY BEEN SUCCESSFUL. However, on this occasion, as I have suggested, we have NEW ECONOMIC REALITIES, in that the Economic Drivers that have backed Economic Growth for over 200 years is now leveling off, before going into actual Decline. Without the Economic back-ups, neither the Austrian, nor the Keynesian basics Economics will restore our Local or the Global Economics to the past Status Quo's, as GROWTH IN DEMAND IS NOW LEVELING AND THEN IT WILL ACTUALLY SHRINK!!! Why would I say such a thing? Is it possible? Well, regrettably YES & here's why - During the historically recent period of global industrialization, the level of human population has been closely related to the amount of energy we have used. http://www.paulchefurka.ca/WEAP/image001.png This means Economic Growth has been underpinned be Population Growth, which in turn was underpinned by Growth in Energy Supply at good Prices. However, putting the Energy Sources in Perspective, we are now faced with a Decline in Energy sources & a rising Cost of Energy, which means that Population Growth would start to level off, then Decline, even if there was no other negative factors driving Population levels down, which there is! http://www.paulchefurka.ca/WEAP/image012.png  As is well known, the Great Depression was finally ended by 2 major factors - 1) The massive Economic stimulus, commonly called WW2. 2) The massive Economic stimulus, commonly called the Baby Boomers generation. These 2 massive stimuli's combined, not only to end the Great Depression, but they provided a boost that would back up Consumer Demand & therefore the Global Economy, for some 60 years! The exceptional period that became the Baby Boomer BOOM is now ending and the combined effects of the Decline of Energy Supply & Rising Energy Prices would normally have spelled a massive problem for the Global Economy, all by itself, BUT when combined with the effects from the Retirement, then death of the largest generation in human history (the Baby Boomers), in a steadily growing demise over the next 20-30 years, the Economic effects will be truly massive! In concert with the Decline of Energy & the Demise of the Baby Boomers, it is likely that the world population may still rise slightly to about 7.5 billion, before starting an inexorable decline to around 2 billion by 2100. http://www.paulchefurka.ca/WEAP/image014.png Whether this scenario plays out in full or only partially, IT IS STILL OBVIOUS THAT THE GOOD OLD DAYS OF DEMAND GROWTH IS NOW ABSOLUTELY DEAD! Like it or not, this is our likely NEW ECONOMIC REALITY, which means that THE INCREASING DEMAND ECONOMY IS NOW SLOWLY DYING, AS IS THE GROWTH ECONOMY! So, we either start looking at things Economic thru something other than rose colored glasses & we start to deal in Reality or we will disappear up our own ass, as will humanity as a whole! The only logical conclusion is that no matter what any Politician may tell you, the "good old days" will not be returned & we either everyone starts living with these new realities OR the final result will be even worse than these scenario's may appear! Some of this post is attributable to - http://www.paulchefurka.ca/WEAP/WEAP.html

Maqqa wrote on Aug 25^th, 2013 at 11:30am:

cods wrote on Aug 25th, 2013 at 11:21am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 25th, 2013 at 11:06am: As usual, those who purport to be Experts (yes - Maqqa & Longy) on Economics, are shown by their silence, to simply be people who formerly thought they were an Economics Exspurts, but who now understand that they are just a drips under pressure!       I take it you are the only expurt on economics on here then?????and nobody else is allowed an opinion.. bit of a ticket you have on yourself percy why are you not working in treasury?? instead of just leaving the few on here to be amazed at your accuracy you are wasted surely? you see cods..... PN cuts and copy from Google searches and claims to be the expert A truly knowledgeable person presents a discussion of concepts, it's application to reality and sprinkles facts into the discussion to back their assertions PN can't do that When PN tries - PN gets all muddled up between theory and reality. Muddle up between idealist textbook written decades in the past and the modern reality The difference here between what longie and I present is far more better than what PN tries to present This difference is comparable to the difference between a cook and a chef PN can't even boil water

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 25^th, 2013 at 11:47am:

cods wrote on Aug 25th, 2013 at 11:21am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 25th, 2013 at 11:06am: As usual, those who purport to be Experts (yes - Maqqa & Longy) on Economics, are shown by their silence, to simply be people who formerly thought they were an Economics Exspurts, but who now understand that they are just a drips under pressure!       I take it you are the only expurt on economics on here then?????and nobody else is allowed an opinion.. bit of a ticket you have on yourself percy why are you not working in treasury?? instead of just leaving the few on here to be amazed at your accuracy you are wasted surely? Unlike some others, I actually recognize that I don't have all the answers! However, I suppose due to my financial sector background, much of which was in insurance, I developed a habit of asking LOTS OF QUESTIONS & DUE TO THAT I MAY TEND TO LOOK A LITTLE DEEPER AT THE WHAT, WHERE, HOW & WHY, of some issues, particularly on Economics? As for "allowing others their opinion", isn't that what is happening, by me posting here & therefore raising the alternative/s for discussion. Of course, that doesn't mean, I will simply allow others to get away with posting things which I understand to be incorrect, particularly on Economic issues & particularly if these other individuals hold themselves out as being ExSpurts", when clearly they are not! As for working for Treasury, why would I want to be constrained within that regime AND in any event, I AM RETIRED & ENJOYING BEING SO! Oh & finally, this thread is meant to be a discussion on the New Realities of Politics & Economics, so I look forward to any comments relating to those actual issues from yourself, Maqqa, Longy & anyone else.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 25^th, 2013 at 11:51am:

Maqqa wrote on Aug 25th, 2013 at 11:30am: cods wrote on Aug 25th, 2013 at 11:21am: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 25th, 2013 at 11:06am: As usual, those who purport to be Experts (yes - Maqqa & Longy) on Economics, are shown by their silence, to simply be people who formerly thought they were an Economics Exspurts, but who now understand that they are just a drips under pressure!       I take it you are the only expurt on economics on here then?????and nobody else is allowed an opinion.. bit of a ticket you have on yourself percy why are you not working in treasury?? instead of just leaving the few on here to be amazed at your accuracy you are wasted surely? you see cods..... PN cuts and copy from Google searches and claims to be the expert A truly knowledgeable person presents a discussion of concepts, it's application to reality and sprinkles facts into the discussion to back their assertions PN can't do that When PN tries - PN gets all muddled up between theory and reality. Muddle up between idealist textbook written decades in the past and the modern reality The difference here between what longie and I present is far more better than what PN tries to present This difference is comparable to the difference between a cook and a chef PN can't even boil water As I said Maqqa, I look forward to any comments relating to those actual issues from yourself, Maqqa, Longy & anyone else. As usual, your SPIN personal comments won't cut the mustard. Of course, you could try to comment on the actual issues, although from your past tries, you won't get too far, as you have an apparent dose of NFI, when it comes to Economic issues!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 25^th, 2013 at 11:09pm:

Mr Abbott said within a decade - after another three elections - the Budget surplus will be 1 per cent of GDP, defence spending increased to 2 per cent of GDP, the private health insurance rebate fully restored but the Government would be a smaller percentage of the economy. Link - http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-features/voters-urged-to-take-a-chance-on-coalition/story-fnho52jj-1226703748536 That is very unlikely, for 2 major reasons - 1) The Economy is very unlikely to recover, given the Global collapse of Economic Drivers and it will most likely deteriorate faster due to the Liberals AUS-terity programs and therefore a Surplus would only occur, IF the OZ Economy was migrating to a much worse place than it is now! 2) Given the likely Economic deterioration, it is extremely unlikely that the Libs would win 2 elections in a row, let alone 3!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 9:16am:

After identifying almost $20bn in savings to be made from one of the most wasteful governments' in our history, Tony Abbott has said that this week will see more savings being made public and the full costings of Coalition policies released in the final week of the campaign... http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/savings-this-week-costings-next-abbott/story-fni0xqi3-1226703913438

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 5:36pm:

It just isn't good enough! Both the Liberals & Labor play similar games, every time an election is called, by leaving their costings until the last moment possible, THUS NOT GIVING SUFFICIENT TIME FOR ANY PROPER EVALUATIONS, LET ALONE PROPER CONSIDERATION BY THE PUBLIC! And, almost as inevitably, both parties claim the other party "cooked the books" and SUDDENLY THE NEW PARTY TAKING OFFICE HAS NOW FOUND THE FINANCIAL POSITION IS MUCH WORSE THAN WAS THOUGHT! Finally, they both "PLAY GAMES", by shifting election dates around to suit their own re-election chances! IT'S TIME ALL THESE GAMES STOPPED & WE GOT - 1) Fixed Term elections, preferably every 4 years, on say the last Saturday in November! 2) Election Costings MUST BE SUBMITTED BY ALL POLITICAL PARTY'S, TO THE RELEVANT PUBLIC SERVICE BODY (PEFO), prior to the end of September for evaluation & PEFO MUST RELEASE THEIR FINDING PRIOR TO THE END OF OCTOBER! No if's, no butt's, just do it, THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE EXCUSE, WHY ANY PARTY CAN NOT COMPLY!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 8:57pm:

Swagman wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 8:15pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 8:09pm: And then, the  cost of the Retiring Boomers will be growing, including Pensions, Health & lower Superannuation bennfits than will be required will finally catch up, together with higher Energy Costs AND THAT'S WHEN THE PROVERBIAL WILL REALLY HIT THE FAN, thus overwhelming the jobs front Just as well the Coalition risked all to bring in the GST. A shrinking tax payer base was one of the critical reasons behind introducing a broad based tax system. Damned pity Hewson's GST was butchered by Lefties in 1993.  20 years of 15% GST (50% more revenues) would have seen this country in a much better state. :( You'd have had more dole in your pocket too Crook....your kind shot themselves in the foot... :) Yes, somehow the election that couldn't be lost by the Libs, was lost! Personally, I would suggest the GST MUST come back into consideration, as PART of a complete overhaul of Taxation, government Costs & the overall government structure!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 7:39pm:

It is very likely that Unemployment will be on an upward trend & that will be the case under either Labor or Liberal. It is also likely that, as in the USA & other countries, the Unemployment rate will be masked to some extent, due to the larger than usual & increasing number of people moving out of the workforce, thus "creating" jobs for others. This "phenomenon" is, of course, due to the Retirement of the largest generation in human history, THE BABY BOOMERS. As that process will continue for quite some time, it will mask the likely REAL Economic position, for a while, until the proverbial really hits the fan, over the next few years & then the real position will become more transparent, unfortunately.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 11:05am:

red baron wrote on Aug 27th, 2013 at 6:56am: Stand by for more acts of derring do by Kevin RUDD when h e got caught with his pants down at an early childhood centre photo opportunity. So there he was talking in Mandarin and generally showing off then he asked a Chinese parent sitting next to him with his child about the centre. Ohh whoops, it was a set up, the 'parent with child' answered that they didn't go there. Just another day in the snake oil, smokes and mirrors campaign that Labor runs. RUDD desperately changed the subject. I agree, it was most likely a set up & it just isn't good enough! And, you know what, both the Liberals & Labor play similar games, particularly every time an election is called! They all carry on, about "transperancy & honesty", BUT 99.9% OF ALL POLLIES HOLD DIFFERENT STANDARDS FOR THEMSELVES, THAN THEY DO FOR EVERYONE ELSE AND IT'S TIME ALL THESE GAMES STOPPED! It's time that this sort of Credible Reliable Abundant Paradoxes was dealt with on a similar line to how the ACCC is supposed to deal with "FALSE ADVERTISING". Call for complaints to be registered & if proven, then THE INDIVIDUAL & THE PARTY SHOULD BE FINED & FINED HEAVILY! FOR REPEAT &/OR SERIOUS OFFENCES, THE PENALTY/S SHOULD BE MORE SUBSTANTIAL, SUCH AS LOSS OF VOTES, LOSS OF SEATS, LOSS OF ELECTION!!!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 7:21pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 7:39pm: It is very likely that Unemployment will be on an upward trend & that will be the case under either Labor or Liberal. It is also likely that, as in the USA & other countries, the Unemployment rate will be masked to some extent, due to the larger than usual & increasing number of people moving out of the workforce, thus "creating" jobs for others. This "phenomenon" is, of course, due to the Retirement of the largest generation in human history, THE BABY BOOMERS. As that process will continue for quite some time, it will mask the likely REAL Economic position, for a while, until the proverbial really hits the fan, over the next few years & then the real position will become more transparent, unfortunately.

If that somehow comes to be true, you should change username to nostrodamus_now

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 27^th, 2013 at 7:39pm:

As is often the case, this is far from simple! Just to add to the complexity, I would suggest that the Baby Bonus should be viewed in concert with PPL. In doing so, I would suggest doing away with the Baby Bonus completely, BUT retaining the PPL in a modest format only, perhaps something like the current arrangement. The Economic imperative that was once the centre piece of most government/s planning was to increase Economic Growth, with Population increase & having more babies, being thought of as the easiest way of achieving those goals. However, with Energy Supply likely to fall substantially over the decades ahead & prices rising, plus substantial Declines in Food & Fresh water Supply, we have to change our thinking on these issues, NOW! Whilst families may still want children, although many will restrict the numbers or not have them at all, it must now remain in the province of those families to make their own decisions and to largely cater for their decision/s on child rearing, themselves.       That said, there still remains an imperative to retain as many female workers in the workforce as possible. Therefore, some PPL will still be required, to try to get as many female workers thru the initial Baby phase, whilst keeping the family unit finances afloat, but also to incentivize them back into the workforce, as quickly as possible. These and many other issues, should form part of a whole of government review, which should happen as soon as possible, irrespective of who wins this election!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 11:55am:

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 3:02pm: Maqqa wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 2:23pm: I note all the austerity talk from lefties as if it's a bad thing Facts are Austerity simply means spending less because the previous government had wasted sooooo much money "Normally", Austerity programs are simply part of the ups & downs of the "Normal" Economic cycle, which have been a "Normal" part of Economics, for much of the last 200 years or so, of the Modern Economic Era! However, this is not a "Normal" Economic cycle, owing to the prolonged impacts of Demographics, Energy Shortages/Price increases & Climate Change! Therefore the "Normal" across the board Austerity programs are (think Europe)/would be (think Australia, the USA & elsewhere) absolutely the wrong thing, at absolutely the wrong time! Indeed, many of the "Normal" Economic fixes applied via both the Austrian & Keynesian Economic schools of thought, which have previously been successfully used, will now prove to be largely ineffective That said, targeted change, to reduce expenses & primary consideration going to improving Productivity, is absolutely the correct thing, as this once in history combination of Economic drivers will continue to impact on us Locally & Globally, for decades to come. WE NEED NEW APPROACHES/SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS, WHICH ARE FAR FROM "NORMAL"! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1372809408/16#16

Nice stuff perceptions, but from my experience economists mostly get there predictions wrong and most dont see economic catastrophes coming as clearly as they would like.

stryder

Its like the joke about a psychic who claims he can see the future, you punch them in the nose and say " you didn't see that coming.

stryder wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 7:31pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 11:55am: perceptions_now wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 3:02pm: Maqqa wrote on Jul 6th, 2013 at 2:23pm: I note all the austerity talk from lefties as if it's a bad thing Facts are Austerity simply means spending less because the previous government had wasted sooooo much money "Normally", Austerity programs are simply part of the ups & downs of the "Normal" Economic cycle, which have been a "Normal" part of Economics, for much of the last 200 years or so, of the Modern Economic Era! However, this is not a "Normal" Economic cycle, owing to the prolonged impacts of Demographics, Energy Shortages/Price increases & Climate Change! Therefore the "Normal" across the board Austerity programs are (think Europe)/would be (think Australia, the USA & elsewhere) absolutely the wrong thing, at absolutely the wrong time! Indeed, many of the "Normal" Economic fixes applied via both the Austrian & Keynesian Economic schools of thought, which have previously been successfully used, will now prove to be largely ineffective That said, targeted change, to reduce expenses & primary consideration going to improving Productivity, is absolutely the correct thing, as this once in history combination of Economic drivers will continue to impact on us Locally & Globally, for decades to come. WE NEED NEW APPROACHES/SOLUTIONS TO THESE PROBLEMS, WHICH ARE FAR FROM "NORMAL"! http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1372809408/16#16 Nice stuff perceptions, but from my experience economists mostly get there predictions wrong and most dont see economic catastrophes coming as clearly.

Agreed, particularly with their Public pronouncements!

Most economists, including both Private & Government, are restricted in what they say Publicly, as even those who think things may not be headed in a "good direction" can not openly say so, because if they do it could well end up being a self-fulfilling prophecy?

That said, many of those same Economists wouldn't have been too far wrong, during most time frames leading up to around 2005, BUT AFTER THAT IS WHEN THE COMBINED CHANGES TO DEMOGRAPHICS & ENERGY SUPPLY/PRICING IN PARTICULAR REALLY STARTED TO KICK IN, GLOBALLY.

So from around 2005, I wouldn't have anywhere near the usual regard, for most of the Economists, irrespective whether they were/are in Private industry or whether they are resident government Guru's, because they are still mainly looking at past trends, not what current change to the major Economic Drivers is doing now, nor what impact those changes will have in the future!  

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY. Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE! perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:15pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???

Woooow, so youre saying that we inherited a 60 billion dollar debt from the Howard/Costello stewardship ???? is that really correct perceptions ???

Political spin or perceptions spin ???

Thats the question.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26^th, 2013 at 11:43am:

All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY. Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE! perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:15pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???

Perceptions this looks fasinating, I wouldnt know where to start to respond to your argument, maybe i should start by why has the media reported an economic position that was left by howard and Costello contary to what your stating here ???


And why did that go under Labors nose ?????????? can you satisfactorily explain that ?

stryder wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 7:59pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 11:43am: All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY. Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE! perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:15pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???     Woooow, so youre saying that we inherited a 60 billion dollar debt from the Howard/Costello stewardship ???? is that really correct perceptions ???

I should make Longy happy & say, YES & No?

The Debt situation/s, as at changeover from the Libs to the Labs was -
Gross Debt - between $58,284B (2007) & $60,462B (2008)
Net Debt - Was actually a Net Credit, between $29,150B (2007) & $44,820B (2008).

stryder wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 8:19pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 11:43am: All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY. Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE! perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:15pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???     Perceptions this looks fasinating, I wouldnt know where to start to respond to your argument, maybe i should start by why has the media reported an economic position that was left by howard and Costello contary to what your stating here ??? And why did that go under Labors nose ?????????? can you satisfactorily explain that ?

These facts are in the Public domain, BUT self-interest then takes over & the relevant party's then place their own SPIN on the facts!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 8:31pm:

stryder wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:19pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 11:43am: All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY. Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE! perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:15pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???     Perceptions this looks fasinating, I wouldnt know where to start to respond to your argument, maybe i should start by why has the media reported an economic position that was left by howard and Costello contary to what your stating here ??? And why did that go under Labors nose ?????????? can you satisfactorily explain that ? These facts are in the Public domain, :BUT self-interest then takes over & the relevant party's then place their own SPIN on the facts( !

Thats funny because you seem to be doing the same thing here it right to support your argument, you realise facts and you twist it to give it a place to fit in your argument which mean it wont automatically ring true after careful thought.,

stryder wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 8:46pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:31pm: stryder wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:19pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 11:43am: All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY. Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE! perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:15pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???     Perceptions this looks fasinating, I wouldnt know where to start to respond to your argument, maybe i should start by why has the media reported an economic position that was left by howard and Costello contary to what your stating here ??? And why did that go under Labors nose ?????????? can you satisfactorily explain that ? These facts are in the Public domain, :BUT self-interest then takes over & the relevant party's then place their own SPIN on the facts( ! Thats funny because you seem to be doing the same thing here it right to support your argument, you realise facts and you twist it to give it a place to fit in your argument which mean it wont automatically ring true after careful thought.,

Really?

How have I just done that & what is MY ARGUMENT?

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 9:06pm:

stryder wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:46pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:31pm: stryder wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:19pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 11:43am: All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY. Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE! perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:15pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???     Perceptions this looks fasinating, I wouldnt know where to start to respond to your argument, maybe i should start by why has the media reported an economic position that was left by howard and Costello contary to what your stating here ??? And why did that go under Labors nose ?????????? can you satisfactorily explain that ? These facts are in the Public domain, :BUT self-interest then takes over & the relevant party's then place their own SPIN on the facts( ! Thats funny because you seem to be doing the same thing here it right to support your argument, you realise facts and you twist it to give it a place to fit in your argument which mean it wont automatically ring true after careful thought., Really? How have I just done that & what is MY ARGUMENT?

I would like to know why hasnt Kevin Rudd being running around not saying "oh the coalition is wrong they didnt leave a 17-20 billion surplus, they left a whopping 60 billion dollar debt all along, they left a debt from a bent for more spending .

because thats not the political narritive nor the story, you are spinning something else of your own making from the facts, you think we can spend more money and not worry about the debt labor is accumulating, the debt now ??

Kevin likes to spend, spend, spend and spend ??

Abbott, likes to cut, cut and cut ?

so whos right and wrong for now, perceptions?

stryder wrote on Aug 29^th, 2013 at 9:15pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 9:06pm: stryder wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:46pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:31pm: stryder wrote on Aug 29th, 2013 at 8:19pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26th, 2013 at 11:43am: All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY. Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE! perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:15pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D Ah, that's what I was referring to here - perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 4:04pm: Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???     Perceptions this looks fasinating, I wouldnt know where to start to respond to your argument, maybe i should start by why has the media reported an economic position that was left by howard and Costello contary to what your stating here ??? And why did that go under Labors nose ?????????? can you satisfactorily explain that ? These facts are in the Public domain, :BUT self-interest then takes over & the relevant party's then place their own SPIN on the facts( ! Thats funny because you seem to be doing the same thing here it right to support your argument, you realise facts and you twist it to give it a place to fit in your argument which mean it wont automatically ring true after careful thought., Really? How have I just done that & what is MY ARGUMENT? I would like to know why hasnt Kevin Rudd being running around not saying "oh the coalition is wrong they didnt leave a 17-20 billion surplus, they left a whopping 60 billion dollar debt all along, they left a debt from a bent for more spending . because thats not the political narritive nor the story, you are spinning something else of your own making from the facts, you think we can spend more money and not worry about the debt labor is accumulating, the debt now ?? Kevin likes to spend, spend, spend and spend ?? Abbott, likes to cut, cut and cut ? so whos right and wrong for now, perceptions?

I think you may find that it has been referred to, But you would need to approach Labor Pollies for their reasoning on not raising it more.
That said, I would venture that it would still be a negative, in the eyes of many voters, as they see the Gross or Net Debt under the Libs, as a better outome than the Labs have had, although most would not give proper weight to the circumstances under which both have operated.
In fact, most wouldn't know, nor care about those circumstances.   

I am simply seeking to say that neither Labors Keynesian approach, nor the Liberal Austrian approach will now be successful, as both could have been in the past, at the correct stage of the Economic cycle!

So, from that perspective, BOTH LABOR & LIBERAL ARE NOW, BOTH WRONG!

My spinning something else, as you put it, is incorrect, I AM SIMPLY TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT WHERE THE LOCAL & GLOBAL ECONOMY IS NOW PLACED, DUE TO WHAT ARE ONCE IN HISTORY CIRCUMSTANCES, THE REALITIES OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST UNDER BOTH LABOR & THE LIBS AND THE LIKELY FUTURE OUTCOMES, UNDER BOTH MAJOR PARTY'S.

As for the future, my estimation is that outcomes will not be good, under either Labor or the Liberals, but under the Libs it is likely to be slightly worse, given their likely policies.

Btw, I think the Libs are likely to win the election.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Chart5.jpg

There are some obvious & some not-so-obvious correlations, in this chart.

It is obvious that Energy issues, particularly Oil, which relate to the possible &/or actual interruption of "normally expected" Energy (Oil) Supply/s will send the Price of Energy (Oil) higher AND depending on "expectations" that may result in a slowing of Economic activity, share market crashes & more.

What isn't so obvious, is that whilst there was a lengthy spike in Oil Prices arising from the Middle East crises, which was followed by a similarly lengthy period of "stability", THE OIL PRICE SPIKE THAT BEGAN IN THE LATE 1990'S ONLY HAD A VERY SHORT PRICE FALL, DUE TO THE CRASHING GLOBAL ECONOMY, BUT IT HAS SINCE SURGED AGAIN, SUPPOSEDLY DUE AGAIN TO RISING MIDDLE EAST TENSIONS.

However, whilst rising M/E Tensions are certainly involved, the major issue is simply that those in the know, are aware that SUPPLY CAN NO LONGER KEEP UP WITH DEMAND, IF THE GLOBAL WERE TO TRY TO RETAIN THE GLOBAL GROWTH STATUS QUO.    

I suspect that much of the M/E tensions are the results of major Economic/Power blocks who are jockeying for positions, in the lead up to when the "proverbial" hits the fan and Energy Supply becomes vastly more important to have, in the "RIGHT CAMP".

That said & no matter who holds the reigns on Energy Supply when TSHTF, the Global outcomes will still be felt be all!

And, IT WON'T MAKE ONE OUNCE OF DIFFERENCE, WHICH POLITICAL PARTY IS IN POWER, IN OZ, AT THE TIME!

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 31^st, 2013 at 2:17pm:

"This" Has Never Happened Outside Of A Recession As the mainstream-media and its status quo "growth's around the corner" lackeys gloat hopefully over this morning's soon-to-be-revised GDP data beat, we noted a rather disturbing trend in a critical part of the report. Real Final Sales growth is collapsing. In fact, the current slow level of growth in real final sales has never occurred outside of a recession... http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2013/08-2/20130829_recess.jpg Link - http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-29/has-never-happened-outside-recession =============================== I think it was Keating who coined the best description of what is now happening - This is the Recession, we had to have! However, when the basic, major Global Economic drivers are viewed in total, the Recession we had to have, is mostly likely erring on the positive side - SUBSTANTIALLY! That said, I wish the winners of next weeks OZ election, the best of luck, AS WE WILL ALL NEED IT! Oh & there will be no Surplus, in a government, led by any Politician, FOR A VERY LONG TIME. CERTAINLY, THERE WILL BE NO SURPLUS, WITHOUT IT CAUSING A MASSIVE RECESSION/DEPRESSION!!!

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2013/08-2/20130829_recess.jpg

perceptions_now wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2013 at 10:13pm:

cods wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 8:30pm: wrote on Sep 2nd, 2013 at 8:20pm: We must have all seen the ads on TV by now where he's spruiking his 7 point contract with Australia. Just to name 2 of them: Two million new jobs Reduce bottlenecks - roads Which begs the question - If he fails to deliver on any of his 7 points (especially the above 2 which have to be the most unlikely for him to achieve), does that mean we the Australian people can launch a class action against him for breach of contract?  ::) I have to admit.. he is such a turn off I dont bother to listen...after 6 years. of basically nothing turning out as they claim it will... I have given up taking any notice of them..... how many times did we hear... a surplus its coming we promise no ifs or buts... annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd........nothing.but debt.. Cods, It seems you may well have stopped listening & watching? I think you will find the TV ad  being referred to, IS A LIBERAL TV ADVERT, FRONTED BY TONY ABBOTT! I think it also mentions - A Stronger Economy Carbon Tax gone Ending Waste & Debt Stopping the boats Oh & btw, IT IS VERY LIKELY THAT NONE OF THOSE THINGS, perhaps with the exception of the axing of the Carbon Tax, WILL ACTUALLY HAPPEN, mainly because the Macro Global Economic Drivers will not allow them to happen! Which also means, they also wouldn't happen, if Labor were to be voted back into office, which is also not likely!