I hope I have got this wrong, but i have read the Tony Abbott is in secret talks about deregulating Australia's bank system. Is this really a good idea. Australia has one most profitable banking systems in the world. I really believe that if it were not for the economic prudence of our financial system Australia would have sunk to the depths of the US and Europe during the GFC.

Is he proposing that we should have a US style banking system where anything goes ? That did wonders over there. We have a financial system the envy of the world and the thought that this foreigner may be trying to break it up makes me livid.

It seems that this government is complicit in the systematic whole sale destruction of this country. I predicted doom and gloom when these guys came to power, I also predicted doom and gloom if the other guys stayed in power.

What i did not predict was that there would ever be a a proposal to trash the only institution this country retains that actually returns a profit and has a longterm future.

If this turns out to be true, the country is finished.

Then rest happy, that at this stage the 2 people having spoken about this from the Liberals; Abbott and Robb say they are not going to do it.

Grendel wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 9:29pm:

Then rest happy, that at this stage the 2 people having spoken about this from the Liberals; Abbott and Robb say they are not going to do it.

they also said they weren't going to introduce any new taxes, weren't going to cut health and education, weren't going to touch pensions, weren't going to 

oh bugger, it there's just to many to list ... you get the drift.

You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story).

Cuts were necessary.

Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question.

The stupid cuts Abbott, Hockey & Cormann are making will likely cause a recession. Private sector still has high debts from the 2001–7 real estate boom. Taking money away from households with little or no discretionary income means these people will have less to spend.

Others think they are next and will save not spend. As the recession gathers pace more people stop spending, even more as unemployment climbs.

So these cuts were not needed and are counterproductive, as people lose their jobs they stop being taxpayers and start being dole recipients. Those under 30 will turn to crime etc to get something to eat. If they stay with parents—parents have less to spend.

Madness—as anyone with any understanding of economics will see. Must be better ways to cut spending/increase tax revenues.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 10:49pm:

You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question.

Easy way to paid off the debt is for the government to print more money.

Read all about here

Best fiscal setting is for the govt to keep running moderate deficits. Some definitions:

1. Deficit—net transfer of money from govt to private sector

2. Surplus—govt takes more from private sector that it gives

Put another way:
Surplus—govt is taxing private sector too much.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 10:49pm:

You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question.

the real question is andrei..

WHAT DID WE GET FOR THAT WHOPPING BIG DEBT....


bugger all.

cods wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 11:16pm:

the real question is andrei.. WHAT DID WE GET FOR THAT WHOPPING BIG DEBT.... bugger all.

still got your pension Cods? Look around at the european countries holding out the begging bowl. Consider yourself lucky.

cods wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 11:16pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:49pm: You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question. the real question is andrei.. WHAT DID WE GET FOR THAT WHOPPING BIG DEBT.... bugger all.

Thing is - this rot began with the Howard government and the GST - since which time governments of both stamps at both Federal and State level have had billions pass through their hands - and yet have clearly shown us they are totally incapable of handling this money.

I'll await the outcome of the next year - then we will see how much Bro Joe borrows with his unlimited ceiling...

These governments, since the 1980's, more resemble a person borrowing to pay credit card bills by getting another credit card....

There's an easily assemblable list right here on OzPol for any government to begin cutting its own spending without culling its paid-up pensioners and the unemployed.

Plenty of scope for taxes where it matters to fill their self-created 'Black Holes'...

Let's ensure that people who come here on sub-contract to avoid tax are taxed when they work here.. simple enough.  Doesn't matter if it's a current loophole - one word will close it - a simple regulation by taxation authorities will ensure that loophole is closed.

cods wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 11:16pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:49pm: You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question. the real question is andrei.. WHAT DID WE GET FOR THAT WHOPPING BIG DEBT.... bugger all.

Survival from the GFC, one of the best economies in the western world and one of the best and richest societies in the world.  ;)

Brought to you by Kevin Rudd and co. ;D

John Smith wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 10:30pm:

Grendel wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 9:29pm: Then rest happy, that at this stage the 2 people having spoken about this from the Liberals; Abbott and Robb say they are not going to do it. they also said they weren't going to introduce any new taxes, weren't going to cut health and education, weren't going to touch pensions, weren't going to  oh bugger, it there's just to many to list ... you get the drift.

... and Gillard said there'd be no carbon tax!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 21^st, 2014 at 7:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:30pm: Grendel wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 9:29pm: Then rest happy, that at this stage the 2 people having spoken about this from the Liberals; Abbott and Robb say they are not going to do it. they also said they weren't going to introduce any new taxes, weren't going to cut health and education, weren't going to touch pensions, weren't going to  oh bugger, it there's just to many to list ... you get the drift. ... and Gillard said there'd be no carbon tax!

And cons when on like cut chooks ... now you are silent on the multitude of abbott's lies.

Hypocrites.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 10:49pm:

You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question.

Check this out. Some INDEPENDENT economists have checked it out and they agree that Bowen is right.

Has the Government doubled the budget deficit?

"Now what's happening here is that Joe Hockey has doubled the deficit, adding $68 billion to the deficit by changes to Government spending and changes to Government assumptions, and now he's asking the Australian people to pay for it",

The verdict

Mr Bowen accurately quoted changes totalling $68 billion in the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook.

The MYEFO forecasts a budget deficit twice as large as it was in the PEFO. The economic assumptions in MYEFO are different from those used in the PEFO, and there is spending in the MYEFO that was not in the previous forecasts.

It remains to be seen how the two sets of forecasts stand the test of time, but as of today, Mr Bowen's claim checks out.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-06/has-the-government-doubled-the-budget-deficit/5423392

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 10:49pm:

You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question.

what has that to do with plans to  de- regulate the banks?

:D :D :D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 21^st, 2014 at 7:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:30pm: Grendel wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 9:29pm: Then rest happy, that at this stage the 2 people having spoken about this from the Liberals; Abbott and Robb say they are not going to do it. they also said they weren't going to introduce any new taxes, weren't going to cut health and education, weren't going to touch pensions, weren't going to  oh bugger, it there's just to many to list ... you get the drift. ... and Gillard said there'd be no carbon tax!

ok, Gillard broke one promise (due to a change in circumstances) and Abbott has lied about single one of his promises .... yet you've condemed Gillard a million times for hers but not said one bad word about Abbotts broken promises  .... :D :D :D :D :D :D

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 10:49pm:

You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question.

Well primarily the debt was caused because the economic downturn reduced income. Cutting spending during or shortly after the crisis would have been very risky.

It's also not "so much". It is manageable. This is clear because there is little difference between the overall budgets are minimal in terms of cost.

The cuts are not necessary per se, and certainly not targeted where they are. There are other options, and this is why the budget is so unpopular.

ian wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 11:56pm:

cods wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 11:16pm: the real question is andrei.. WHAT DID WE GET FOR THAT WHOPPING BIG DEBT.... bugger all. still got your pension Cods? Look around at the european countries holding out the begging bowl. Consider yourself lucky.

And the $900 stimulus payment?
And the heavily discounted insulation in your ceiling?

;)

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 10:49pm:

You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question.

Which has to do exactly what with deregulating the banking system??

:D

Lobo wrote on Jun 21^st, 2014 at 2:46pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:49pm: You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question. Which has to do exactly what with deregulating the banking system?? :D

don't argue with Andrei ... he's the best accountant in his world .. he knows how these things work.

You cannot deregulate a bank if the govt. keeps running deficits ....

Kytro wrote on Jun 21^st, 2014 at 12:11pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:49pm: You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question. Well primarily the debt was caused because the economic downturn reduced income. Cutting spending during or shortly after the crisis would have been very risky. It's also not "so much". It is manageable. This is clear because there is little difference between the overall budgets are minimal in terms of cost. The cuts are not necessary per se, and certainly not targeted where they are. There are other options, and this is why the budget is so unpopular.

On top of what you say is also the situation where the majority of budget expenditure is sewn up in legislation. To wind back the spending program would require passage through the parliament. By the time this happens, the debts already exist.

Quote:

You cannot deregulate a bank if the govt. keeps running deficits ....

Why not ?

crocodile wrote on Jun 21^st, 2014 at 5:21pm:

Quote: You cannot deregulate a bank if the govt. keeps running deficits .... Why not ?

don't ask me ... Andrei was the one who seems to think one affects the other.

John Smith wrote on Jun 20^th, 2014 at 10:30pm:

Grendel wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 9:29pm: Then rest happy, that at this stage the 2 people having spoken about this from the Liberals; Abbott and Robb say they are not going to do it. they also said they weren't going to introduce any new taxes, weren't going to cut health and education, weren't going to touch pensions, weren't going to  oh bugger, it there's just to many to list ... you get the drift.

There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead... lie of the century.

Apples and Oranges when it comes to the budget.

It never had to happen, unfortunately many of the Coalition budget measures do have to happen.

No they don’t.

Cut out negative gearing, FBT fiddles, stuff like that. No need to see under30s reduced to begging, crime etc to live, dreadful waste of human potential.

I gave up on the Libs, formally resigned from the Party because they are no longer liberal, they are neoconservatives and would happily see all of us here thrown into the street to help a crony of theirs.

Tony wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2014 at 11:48am:

No they don’t. Cut out negative gearing, FBT fiddles, stuff like that. No need to see under30s reduced to begging, crime etc to live, dreadful waste of human potential. I gave up on the Libs, formally resigned from the Party because they are no longer liberal, they are neoconservatives and would happily see all of us here thrown into the street to help a crony of theirs.

Yes they do....  care to compare a full list of measures.
:D

crocodile wrote on Jun 21^st, 2014 at 5:20pm:

Kytro wrote on Jun 21st, 2014 at 12:11pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:49pm: You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question. Well primarily the debt was caused because the economic downturn reduced income. Cutting spending during or shortly after the crisis would have been very risky. It's also not "so much". It is manageable. This is clear because there is little difference between the overall budgets are minimal in terms of cost. The cuts are not necessary per se, and certainly not targeted where they are. There are other options, and this is why the budget is so unpopular. On top of what you say is also the situation where the majority of budget expenditure is sewn up in legislation. To wind back the spending program would require passage through the parliament. By the time this happens, the debts already exist.

Perhaps then, tax should be increased to compensate until such time as the economy improves. Taxation is low at the moment and it should be adjusted from time to time.

Grendel wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2014 at 11:42am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:30pm: Grendel wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 9:29pm: Then rest happy, that at this stage the 2 people having spoken about this from the Liberals; Abbott and Robb say they are not going to do it. they also said they weren't going to introduce any new taxes, weren't going to cut health and education, weren't going to touch pensions, weren't going to  oh bugger, it there's just to many to list ... you get the drift. There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead... lie of the century. Apples and Oranges when it comes to the budget. It never had to happen, unfortunately many of the Coalition budget measures do have to happen.

for someone who's always crying about how they're not biased, you certainly make a good Abbott sychophant

'Had to happen' ????  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D  Only in your little head maybe ... nothing had to happen ... just as he didn't HAVE to promise that they wouldn't, knowing full well that they would

I'm sorry, but since I'm not a rusted-on like You Johnboy I can see past your political bias and to the reality of the situation and no we cannot keep going down the path the ALP was taking us.
Even Malcolm Turnbull who would make a fine Leader for the ALP admits they were taking us down the toilet.
Wakey wakey Johnboy.  :D :D :D
The fact you deny certain things need and have to happen is a testament to your stupidity and political bias.  :D :D :D

Kytro wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2014 at 2:23pm:

crocodile wrote on Jun 21st, 2014 at 5:20pm: Kytro wrote on Jun 21st, 2014 at 12:11pm: Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 20th, 2014 at 10:49pm: You do realise they took over from a Government that increased debt every single year (despite promising not to - but that's another story). Cuts were necessary. Why did the last lot run up so much debt? That's the question. Well primarily the debt was caused because the economic downturn reduced income. Cutting spending during or shortly after the crisis would have been very risky. It's also not "so much". It is manageable. This is clear because there is little difference between the overall budgets are minimal in terms of cost. The cuts are not necessary per se, and certainly not targeted where they are. There are other options, and this is why the budget is so unpopular. On top of what you say is also the situation where the majority of budget expenditure is sewn up in legislation. To wind back the spending program would require passage through the parliament. By the time this happens, the debts already exist. Perhaps then, tax should be increased to compensate until such time as the economy improves. Taxation is low at the moment and it should be adjusted from time to time.

Taxation changes are also subject to legislation. The drop in expected revenue happens before any programs for winding back expenditure or increasing taxes can be put before the parliament. Unfortunately, the shortfall has to be covered by borrowing money. It really is that simple.

It is also worth pointing out that raising taxes does not always cause a linear rise in revenue.

Grendel wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2014 at 7:07pm:

I'm sorry, but since I'm not a rusted-on like You Johnboy I can see past your political bias and to the reality of the situation and no we cannot keep going down the path the ALP was taking us. Even Malcolm Turnbull who would make a fine Leader for the ALP admits they were taking us down the toilet. Wakey wakey Johnboy.  :D :D :D The fact you deny certain things need and have to happen is a testament to your stupidity and political bias.  :D :D :D

yes, Grendel ... you've already made it clear that you think that Abbott had to promise everything and then he had to break every single promise ... ;D ;D ;D

How insidious is this TPP that mogodon Robb is playing with.


Quote:

Jane Kelsey, Law Professor at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, has provided a preliminary analysis of the draft. In Memorandum on Leaked TISA Financial Services Text, Kelsey writes that the secrecy “runs counter to moves in the WTO [World Trade Organization] towards greater openness,” that the agreement appears to be “a new template for future free trade agreements and ultimately for the WTO” and that participating governments “will: be expected to lock in and extend their current levels of financial deregulation and liberalisation; lose the right to require data to be held onshore; face pressure to authorise potentially toxic insurance products; and risk a legal challenge if they adopt measures to prevent or respond to another crisis.”

This is a bankers wet dream.


Quote:

Lori Wallach, Director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch put out this statement on the leak: This is a text that big banks and financial speculators may love but that could do real damage to the rest of us. It includes a provision that is literally called ‘standstill’ that would forbid countries from improving financial regulation and would lock them into whatever policies they had on the books in the past.”

http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/another-atrocious-corporate-trade-scheme-planned-secret-comes?akid=11943.1893232.kEmgmX&rd=1&src=newsletter1005187&t=27

This govt are a mob of sellouts!

[url]One reason neoconservatism survives is that its members don't care how wrong they've been, or even about right and wrong itself. True to their Trotskyite and Straussian roots, neoconservatives have always been willing to play fast and loose with the truth in order to advance political goals. We know that they were willing to cook the books on intelligence and make outrageously false claims in order to sell the Iraq war, for example, and today they construct equally false narratives that deny their own responsibility for the current mess in Iraq and portray their war as a great success that was squandered by Obama. And the entire movement seems congenitally incapable of admitting error, or apologizing to the thousands of people whose lives they have squandered or damaged irreparably.[/url]

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/06/20/being_a_neocon_means_never_having_to_say_you_re_sorry_dick_cheney_william_kristol

I suggest you all, left & right, read the article.

John Smith wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2014 at 7:36pm:

Grendel wrote on Jun 22nd, 2014 at 7:07pm: I'm sorry, but since I'm not a rusted-on like You Johnboy I can see past your political bias and to the reality of the situation and no we cannot keep going down the path the ALP was taking us. Even Malcolm Turnbull who would make a fine Leader for the ALP admits they were taking us down the toilet. Wakey wakey Johnboy.  :D :D :D The fact you deny certain things need and have to happen is a testament to your stupidity and political bias.  :D :D :D yes, Grendel ... you've already made it clear that you think that Abbott had to promise everything and then he had to break every single promise ... ;D ;D ;D

Don't lie about what I say and think thanks Troll dear...

Grendel wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2014 at 11:47pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 22nd, 2014 at 7:36pm: Grendel wrote on Jun 22nd, 2014 at 7:07pm: I'm sorry, but since I'm not a rusted-on like You Johnboy I can see past your political bias and to the reality of the situation and no we cannot keep going down the path the ALP was taking us. Even Malcolm Turnbull who would make a fine Leader for the ALP admits they were taking us down the toilet. Wakey wakey Johnboy.  :D :D :D The fact you deny certain things need and have to happen is a testament to your stupidity and political bias.  :D :D :D yes, Grendel ... you've already made it clear that you think that Abbott had to promise everything and then he had to break every single promise ... ;D ;D ;D Don't lie about what I say and think thanks Troll dear...

where's the lie?


Grendel wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2014 at 11:42am:

unfortunately many of the Coalition budget measures do have to happen.