Australian Politics Forum - NT Labor gives Gillard the flick

TheGreenLight Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 633 Gender:	Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick Reply #30 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:53pm So, is there even anyone here from the NT? If there is, are you going to be as stupid as NSW and Qld, and give them unjustified and ridiculous control of your territory? It hasn't really worked out well for those states.
Back to top	IP Logged

Gist

Gold Member

Offline

I am not a sock, I am
a human being!

Posts: 5476

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #31 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:56pm

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:52pm:

Gist wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:47pm:

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:34pm:

Gist wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 3:07pm:

Shane B wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 2:46pm:

Here you go, debt currently at $238 billion.

http://aofm.gov.au/

That isn't what I asked.

You're comparing today's debt against past debt without any adjustment whatsoever and then claiming that debt today is at RECORD levels. That was your claim. And that's just plain WRONG.

Here, try this one instead. This one from Treasury http://archive.treasury.gov.au/documents/1496/PDF/01_Debt.pdf shows debt is nowhere near record levels historically.

What a classic.. using a graph from the HOWARD era to try and prove that Rudd/Gillard dont have much debt.

What were those two degrees in, Gist? Dance and Womens studies?

Do I have to spoon feed you every step of the way? Go look in the Treasury reports if you want something more recent than 2008. You [b]do[b] know how to do that don't you? Or are you still waiting for that high school kid to come back to you with the explanation of the ether theory so he can run a google search for you?

You mean the treasury reports that show current govt net debt at $238B??? or the CPI calculation that shows that it is record debt?

What is it about you and basic maths? And while I grant that using exponentiation is a high school maths level, it is far from difficult. Or are you going to pretend now that $238B is LESS than $96B or that even with generous indexation that $238B is less than $220B?

And lets not forget that net debt is rising $2B a month still. So there is still plenty of room for the debt ceiling to be breached.

Are these the treasury reports you're unable to find? Or some other treasury reports? Longliar if you think I'm going to take any of your so-called facts on face value you're completely wrong. You are a serial liar. Back up what you say or don't bother.

Back to top

"When our military goes to war it should be for purposes and objectives clearly in Australia’s interests, not merely because the Americans want some company" - Malcolm Fraser (2012 Whitlam Oration)

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #32 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:56pm

TheGreenLight wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:53pm:

So, is there even anyone here from the NT? If there is, are you going to be as stupid as NSW and Qld, and give them unjustified and ridiculous control of your territory? It hasn't really worked out well for those states.

get used to it, greendarkness. The country is seeing the light and voting for parties that can actually count and pay off debts and all those other neat little tricks that labor and greenies dont understand.

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #33 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:58pm

Gist wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:56pm:

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:52pm:

Gist wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:47pm:

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:34pm:

Gist wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 3:07pm:

Shane B wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 2:46pm:

Here you go, debt currently at $238 billion.

http://aofm.gov.au/

That isn't what I asked.

You're comparing today's debt against past debt without any adjustment whatsoever and then claiming that debt today is at RECORD levels. That was your claim. And that's just plain WRONG.

Here, try this one instead. This one from Treasury http://archive.treasury.gov.au/documents/1496/PDF/01_Debt.pdf shows debt is nowhere near record levels historically.

What a classic.. using a graph from the HOWARD era to try and prove that Rudd/Gillard dont have much debt.

What were those two degrees in, Gist? Dance and Womens studies?

Do I have to spoon feed you every step of the way? Go look in the Treasury reports if you want something more recent than 2008. You [b]do[b] know how to do that don't you? Or are you still waiting for that high school kid to come back to you with the explanation of the ether theory so he can run a google search for you?

You mean the treasury reports that show current govt net debt at $238B??? or the CPI calculation that shows that it is record debt?

What is it about you and basic maths? And while I grant that using exponentiation is a high school maths level, it is far from difficult. Or are you going to pretend now that $238B is LESS than $96B or that even with generous indexation that $238B is less than $220B?

And lets not forget that net debt is rising $2B a month still. So there is still plenty of room for the debt ceiling to be breached.

Are these the treasury reports you're unable to find? Or some other treasury reports? Longliar if you think I'm going to take any of your so-called facts on face value you're completely wrong. You are a serial liar. Back up what you say or don't bother.

it is always entertaining 'debating' with labor dopes like you. The first thing you do is say things like, "keating left no debt' or 'Gillard's debt is trivial' and then expect people to accept it. But in the same breath you breathe fire and brimstone over Howards 1983 debt of NINE BILLION dollars. IN the meantime as Gillard strides towards $0.3TRILLION dollars n debt, the small minds are saying 'it aint so' despite even treasury saying otherwise.

Back to top

IP Logged

Gist

Gold Member

Offline

I am not a sock, I am
a human being!

Posts: 5476

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #34 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:06pm

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:58pm:

it is always entertaining 'debating' with labor dopes like you. The first thing you do is say things like, "keating left no debt' or 'Gillard's debt is trivial' and then expect people to accept it. But in the same breath you breathe fire and brimstone over Howards 1983 debt of NINE BILLION dollars. IN the meantime as Gillard strides towards $0.3TRILLION dollars n debt, the small minds are saying 'it aint so' despite even treasury saying otherwise.

Actually, I've never said any of those things. More lies from you.

In the meantime, getting back to the thrust of my argument (after our humorous little side trip showing longliar can't even use a calculator without lying) -

Shane said debt was at record levels. Well... that depends on how you measure it, doesn't it? Which is why I quizzed him. Certainly in terms of percentage of GDP it ain't anywhere near record levels and in fact is pretty low in historical terms.

Back to top

"When our military goes to war it should be for purposes and objectives clearly in Australia’s interests, not merely because the Americans want some company" - Malcolm Fraser (2012 Whitlam Oration)

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #35 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:14pm

Gist wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:06pm:

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:58pm:

it is always entertaining 'debating' with labor dopes like you. The first thing you do is say things like, "keating left no debt' or 'Gillard's debt is trivial' and then expect people to accept it. But in the same breath you breathe fire and brimstone over Howards 1983 debt of NINE BILLION dollars. IN the meantime as Gillard strides towards $0.3TRILLION dollars n debt, the small minds are saying 'it aint so' despite even treasury saying otherwise.

Actually, I've never said any of those things. More lies from you.

In the meantime, getting back to the thrust of my argument (after our humorous little side trip showing longliar can't even use a calculator without lying) -

Shane said debt was at record levels. Well... that depends on how you measure it, doesn't it? Which is why I quizzed him. Certainly in terms of percentage of GDP it ain't anywhere near record levels and in fact is pretty low in historical terms.

There are always ways for politicians to restate any figure so that it looks good. Debt? no worries. just compare it to Japan so we look good? Libs produce a surplues? no problem1 Let's say they were in 'structural deficit'. Net debt a problem? simple. include asset valuations (obviously overstated) for the first time ever.

But of course the coup de grace is to compare govt debt against GDP. its a wonderful measure allowing the idea that govt debt is dropping to be invented simply by having a strong economy. the flipside is that in a recession, your debt level magically increases massively despite not borrowing a dollar.

I could try that trick by referring to my mortgage as a debt relative to my income and of course include the asset value as well. All sounds good until you have to pay a bill with money you dont have but somehow you are still rich.

Net debt under Rudd and Gillard is a lot higher than Keating ever reached and still growing at $25B (or more) annually. How you defend that as something good and a spectacular performance is a reflection on your own lack of intelligence.

When we go to pay of this enormous debt, the lenders wont be asking for x% of GDP. They will be asking for dollars - yours mine and everyone elses.

Back to top

IP Logged

Gist

Gold Member

Offline

I am not a sock, I am
a human being!

Posts: 5476

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #36 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:46pm

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:14pm:

There are always ways for politicians to restate any figure so that it looks good. Debt? no worries. just compare it to Japan so we look good? Libs produce a surplues? no problem1 Let's say they were in 'structural deficit'. Net debt a problem? simple. include asset valuations (obviously overstated) for the first time ever.

Politicians may well do that. I didn't. Still more lies from you...

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:14pm:

But of course the coup de grace is to compare govt debt against GDP. its a wonderful measure allowing the idea that govt debt is dropping to be invented simply by having a strong economy. the flipside is that in a recession, your debt level magically increases massively despite not borrowing a dollar.

I could try that trick by referring to my mortgage as a debt relative to my income and of course include the asset value as well. All sounds good until you have to pay a bill with money you dont have but somehow you are still rich.

Yes, correct, that can happen in a recession. So are you saying we should never go into debt? Using your mortgage analogy almost nobody would ever be able to afford to buy a home if they didn't go into debt. The question is what is affordable. Now you can argue that point till you're blue in the face but to argue that NO debt is ALWAYS a good thing is pretty simplistic, if a not completely stupid position.

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:14pm:

Net debt under Rudd and Gillard is a lot higher than Keating ever reached and still growing at $25B (or more) annually. How you defend that as something good and a spectacular performance is a reflection on your own lack of intelligence.

Pah! Look at that, the class clown calling people dumb. I'm worried! Cheesy

In any case, you have YET AGAIN completely failed to understand what I said. Maybe in future you could try responding to what I'm actually saying rather than what your imaginary friend there in liarland tells you I'm saying.

Back to top

"When our military goes to war it should be for purposes and objectives clearly in Australia’s interests, not merely because the Americans want some company" - Malcolm Fraser (2012 Whitlam Oration)

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #37 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:56pm

the last election watching the labor sitting member Steve Whan doing his best to sell god knows what

he had all his ALP paraphernalia round the back of his tent..out of sight... it will be interesting to see what the local ALP members do in Oct..

as it is in the area I live in they are very very unpopular and its got not a lot to do with gillard!!!!.

so we shall see .

Back to top

IP Logged

Shane B

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1473
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #38 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 7:05pm

cods wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:56pm:

the last election watching the labor sitting member Steve Whan doing his best to sell god knows what

he had all his ALP paraphernalia round the back of his tent..out of sight... it will be interesting to see what the local ALP members do in Oct..

as it is in the area I live in they are very very unpopular and its got not a lot to do with gillard!!!!.

so we shall see .

Unfortunately cods there are so many fruit loops here in Canberra keep voting Labor no matter what.

Back to top

Julia Gillard - twice selected, never elected.

We're still paying for the Whitlam Government.

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #39 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 7:08pm

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:14pm:

Gist wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:06pm:

gold_medal wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 5:58pm:

it is always entertaining 'debating' with labor dopes like you. The first thing you do is say things like, "keating left no debt' or 'Gillard's debt is trivial' and then expect people to accept it. But in the same breath you breathe fire and brimstone over Howards 1983 debt of NINE BILLION dollars. IN the meantime as Gillard strides towards $0.3TRILLION dollars n debt, the small minds are saying 'it aint so' despite even treasury saying otherwise.

Actually, I've never said any of those things. More lies from you.

In the meantime, getting back to the thrust of my argument (after our humorous little side trip showing longliar can't even use a calculator without lying) -

Shane said debt was at record levels. Well... that depends on how you measure it, doesn't it? Which is why I quizzed him. Certainly in terms of percentage of GDP it ain't anywhere near record levels and in fact is pretty low in historical terms.

There are always ways for politicians to restate any figure so that it looks good. Debt? no worries. just compare it to Japan so we look good? Libs produce a surplues? no problem1 Let's say they were in 'structural deficit'. Net debt a problem? simple. include asset valuations (obviously overstated) for the first time ever.

But of course the coup de grace is to compare govt debt against GDP. its a wonderful measure allowing the idea that govt debt is dropping to be invented simply by having a strong economy. the flipside is that in a recession, your debt level magically increases massively despite not borrowing a dollar.

I could try that trick by referring to my mortgage as a debt relative to my income and of course include the asset value as well. All sounds good until you have to pay a bill with money you dont have but somehow you are still rich.

Net debt under Rudd and Gillard is a lot higher than Keating ever reached and still growing at $25B (or more) annually. How you defend that as something good and a spectacular performance is a reflection on your own lack of intelligence.

When we go to pay of this enormous debt, the lenders wont be asking for x% of GDP. They will be asking for dollars - yours mine and everyone elses.

aint that the truth....cash aint dead....

lets be honest here shares are not the gold mine they once were..I read where our local councils have invested millions and now have lost millions..so who will they ask to pick up and pay the BILL???????????

not the wise ones that invested our money without asking in the first place..thats for sure..

I think anyone with half a brain would know by now govts do not tell us the truth...look at the way unemployment figures are fiddled.. come on I am not saying its only this govt either its all govts the world over. and debt I think would be the last thing they would own

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: NT Labor gives Gillard the flick
Reply #40 - Aug 8^th, 2012 at 7:18pm

Shane B wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 7:05pm:

cods wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 6:56pm:

the last election watching the labor sitting member Steve Whan doing his best to sell god knows what

he had all his ALP paraphernalia round the back of his tent..out of sight... it will be interesting to see what the local ALP members do in Oct..

as it is in the area I live in they are very very unpopular and its got not a lot to do with gillard!!!!.

so we shall see .

Unfortunately cods there are so many fruit loops here in Canberra keep voting Labor no matter what.

in this town you are not wrong.. so many on the public purse and they look out for themselves..

as it is last election is was a draw and the greens had the vital vote and they went with Labor..so it will be interesting to see if they hurt themselves doing that...

I do not want to hear another word from the greens about trees... I am not allowed to cut down a tree even if its digging up the foundation or the drains.. yet this govnt has allowed developers to bulldoze hundreds and hundreds of trees just flatten the place which means we are now all covered in grey dirt.when you point this out to those in charge they dismiss it as if it never happened????...well by the time 20000/30000 houses pop up on land that once had zero...the roads will be chaos..and frustration to the hilt like Sydney..another 20 years and this town will be mini Sydney all over again.

Back to top

IP Logged