Budget 2017: Consumers aren't buying it, Westpac says   

ABC News
May 17 2017


The federal budget has failed to fire up consumers' flagging spirits with confidence slipping in its immediate aftermath.   :(
Key points:

    Consumers sunk deeper into pessimism in May
    Only 7pc of said the budget would improve their financial situation, 33pc said things would be worse
    Housing sentiment slips to second lowest reading since 2008

The Westpac-Melbourne Institute's respected monthly survey of consumer confidence found a further deterioration of sentiment in its May survey, and a pronounced slip in a second round of interviews after the budget.   :(

Consumer sentiment fell by 1.1 per cent, from 99 to 98, in an index where 100 represents an equal weighting of pessimism and optimism.

The survey was conducted from May 8-13, with two days of the survey pre-budget and four after Treasurer Scott Morrison's speech.

"The index for the pre-budge' period printed 98.1 and for the post-budget period it printed 97.9," Westpac's chief economist Bill Evans said.

Mr Evans said whilst the move was small, there were some significant moves within the survey.

    "Respondents' confidence in housing and the outlook for house prices deteriorated sharply, while the assessment of the budget around the outlook for family finances was decidedly weaker," he said.   :(

To the specific question, "What impact do you expect the budget to have on your family finances over the next 12 months?", the survey showed 7 per cent said conditions would improve and 33 per cent said things would get worse.

The remainder indicated either "stay the same" (50 per cent), or "don't know" (10 per cent).


"The disappointment for the Government will be that despite its high expectations and its focus on spending — particularly in infrastructure, education and health — consumer sentiment remains "stuck" below the significant 100 level, indicating that pessimists continue to outnumber optimists," Mr Evans said.   :(

Confidence in housing took a big hit in May, in the aftermath of a round of out-of-cycle home loan rate hikes and some tough talking from the likes of the Reserve Bank and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority.

On the question whether now was a good time to buy a house, the survey dropped 6.5 per cent, the second-lowest reading since 2008 when house prices were falling and the RBA was raising rates.

The House Price Expectations Index tumbled almost 9 per cent with big falls concentrated in New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia.

The only positive sentiment detected was a general feeling that employment prospects were picking up.

"However, with a flat response to the budget, respondents remaining concerned about their finances and no signs of any improvement in wages prospects, the risks of weak household spending feeding back onto employment and investment will remain a concern for policy makers," Mr Evans said.   :(

He said the pessimistic view on consumer spending was likely to see the RBA leave rates on hold for the rest of the year as well as 2018, despite markets pricing in future rate hikes.

Why would their not be a negative response. The primary move in the budget was to give business another $65B This is just back to failed 70's policy depending on trickle down to provide a benefit when we know that it does not work.

Another expensive unaffordable Failed budget from the Libtards.

gee, I wonder why consumer confidence didn't go up with a budget that gave tax cuts to the rick and to corporations, and a tax hike to every one else. :D :D :D :D

who didn't see that coming apart from the libs?

Confidence will rise when the libs are drop punted to the political wastelands

FIRING UP CONSUMERS has been tried elsewhere, FOLLOWING THE GFC AND HAS NOT SUCCEEDED!

AND, IT WON'T SUCCEED HERE (in OZ), under either Liberal nor Labor, AS THE KEY GLOBAL ECONOMIC DRIVERS, which have usually driven Economic Growth in the Modern Economic era ARE NOW GOING INTO REVERSE, as we have reached some limits which can not be exceeded, without adverse reactions and everything has limits!

Btw, for those who may not be aware, the usual Economic drivers over much of the Modern era have been -
1) Demographics (Substantial Population Growth)
2) Energy (Cheap & Readily Available)
3) Climate (A Goldilocks Climate has been the NORM, But that is now changing)

AND, Despite or because of the Economic Stimulus's applied by many countries, DEBT IS NOW RISING TO THE TIPPING POINT, WHERE GFC2 WILL COMMENCE, But it will be much worse than GFC1, for a number of reasons and commencement of GFC2 is now only a matter of timing!   

Mostly it is due to neoconservative philosophy, taking money from the poor and giving it to the already rich.

Energy—we can invest in renewable energy and nuclear. Jobs and cheap power.

Climate—we can, if we had the will, act to reduce GHG concentrations in the atmosphere by emitting less and trapping CO2, e.g. by mass planting of fast growing bamboo that can be turned into paper, flooring, even bedsheets and the like. This won’t be easy, too many now don’t want to face up to AGW/carbon pollution but that will change.

Getting rid of neoconservatism etc will get economies moving again.

As much as I take issue with a lot of the direction the current Government is taking, being a Coalition budget, traditionally you can deal with much of that because you can at least take the boost to confidence, but this budget doesn't even deliver that.

The Coalition would normally under invest is so many vital areas but at least pay off some of what Labor has had to spend in order to make up for that.

Now there isn't even that...

I wish those idiots would just work together and budget for the things we need including for our future but do it in a way that doesn't break the bank.  I'm sure it's possible, but ideology on both side would have to go out the window.

Not gonna happen...

Dnarever wrote on May 20^th, 2017 at 8:33am:

Why would their not be a negative response. The primary move in the budget was to give business another $65B This is just back to failed 70's policy depending on trickle down to provide a benefit when we know that it does not work. Another expensive unaffordable Failed budget from the Libtards.

And there will be a wailing and a gnashing of teeth when the Senate tells them to stuff it.... how - oh, how can a government pursue its mandate under these conditions?  We need a loaded Senate election to ensure the majority party in the house  can dictate to the nation (oops) run the show properly and achieve progress, development, infrastructure advance, and Jobson Growthe....

Jovial Monk wrote on May 20^th, 2017 at 11:28am:

Mostly it is due to neoconservative philosophy, taking money from the poor and giving it to the already rich. Energy—we can invest in renewable energy and nuclear. Jobs and cheap power. Climate—we can, if we had the will, act to reduce GHG concentrations in the atmosphere by emitting less and trapping CO2, e.g. by mass planting of fast growing bamboo that can be turned into paper, flooring, even bedsheets and the like. This won’t be easy, too many now don’t want to face up to AGW/carbon pollution but that will change. Getting rid of neoconservatism etc will get economies moving again.

Bamboo likes water - where ya gonna get it?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on May 20^th, 2017 at 12:14pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 8:33am: Why would their not be a negative response. The primary move in the budget was to give business another $65B This is just back to failed 70's policy depending on trickle down to provide a benefit when we know that it does not work. Another expensive unaffordable Failed budget from the Libtards. And there will be a wailing and a gnashing of teeth when the Senate tells them to stuff it.... how - oh, how can a government pursue its mandate under these conditions?  We need a loaded Senate election to ensure the majority party in the house  can dictate to the nation (oops) run the show properly and achieve progress, development, infrastructure advance, and Jobson Growthe....

The reason the senate is there is the exact opposite of what you suggest. The government has lost a lot of legislation because it was very poor legislation. The reason for the senate to specifically to do this. They moderate both party's by blocking their mistakes.

Giving either party full control as we seen with Howard will produce ideology not progress.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on May 20^th, 2017 at 12:15pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on May 20th, 2017 at 11:28am: Mostly it is due to neoconservative philosophy, taking money from the poor and giving it to the already rich. Energy—we can invest in renewable energy and nuclear. Jobs and cheap power. Climate—we can, if we had the will, act to reduce GHG concentrations in the atmosphere by emitting less and trapping CO2, e.g. by mass planting of fast growing bamboo that can be turned into paper, flooring, even bedsheets and the like. This won’t be easy, too many now don’t want to face up to AGW/carbon pollution but that will change. Getting rid of neoconservatism etc will get economies moving again. Bamboo likes water - where ya gonna get it?

If we want fast growing bamboo plant it in the tropics maybe?

Federal Budget Has Failed To Fire Up Consumers

Did anyone say it would ?

Surely nobody is that stupid ?

The MSM made out Snot Morriscum could walk on water for a day or two, even they have dropped that now.