lee wrote on Feb 8^th, 2026 at 9:24pm:


Govts,  ARE trying - by trying to reducing taxes (to get elected) and ignoring government debt (which greedy conservatives always  scream about) -  and faling all around the world. Do try to keep up.

Quote:


Yes, so why did you raise "off budget" funding (which is a fraud)) the question is how to fund the budget.

Quote:
 

The point is a currency-issuing government's debt is profoundly different to YOUR debt., for the reasons given. Your incapacited brain apparently  can't even consider the difference between a currency-issuer and a currency-user, in relation to debt.

Note:  a currency-issuing government can always  issue debt denominated in its own currency, (provided the economy remains productive).   

Quote:


No it doesn't: your brain - incapacited by Neoclassical "scarcity economics" -  can't begin to understand the capacity ofa currency issuer to subsidize consumption (when the rresources are available). 

Quote:


Education isn't "scarce" (there's that word again) , and the TAFE trained builders will be paid by the government.

Every point you make is based on the "taxpayer money" myth.


Quote:


Your error: (blind ideology or low IQ). Private housing is attractive/desirable for those who can afford it , they get to choose features and localities they like, not necessarily available with public housing.   

Quote:


Low IQ, apparently I need to define McMansions for you.

Meanwhile, everyone needs a house. Explain how the private sector, alone, can achieve this necessary outcome, when average wages can no longer buy an afforabl;ee house, and lower income groups can't even rent.

You already rejected free training and employment of home builders employed by the government.

Quote:


The debate certainly highlights the paucity of your Neoclassical "scarcity economics" ; there is no scarcity of resources in Oz  (including TAFE colleges)  which prevents the Oz government from delivering secure housing for all, ASAP.   

lee wrote on Feb 9^th, 2026 at 3:47pm:


Dummy, they are trying but failing, due to your blind, obsolete Neoclassical  'scarcity economics' ideology.

eg, Starmer's govt., like many,  is on the nose after a year, because Rachel Reeves can't balance the books without raising taxes or reducing spending.  See below.

Quote:


The public - because pollies want to conceal debt numbers - owing to YOUR obsolete "scarcity economics" trumpeted by ignorant mainmstream media and economists who are screaming  "balance the budget" - by reducing spending, of course. 


Quote:


Your errors:

1. a currency-issuer doesn't NEED to borrow, being an obsolete convention of obsolete Neoclassical "scarcity economics'.

2. Even so, Japan and the US prove massive borrowing and debt can stand without crashing the economy, bond vigilantes can't touch productive economies.    

Quote:


Correct, at last  .....(but why do I suspect you aren't using your brain to arrive at that correct statement....)

Quote:


Your errors: "available" means available for the government to purchase (including by nationalization), if the private sector can't mobilize the nation's resources to achieve  government goals eg net zero. Even Dutton wanted a government-owned nuclear industry in Oz.   

Quote:


More of your  obsolete "scarcity" economics....

Quote:


The myth is c-i government needs taxpayer money. Fact is a currency-issuing government ...oh, never mind...

Quote:


That's the mainstream's "scarcity economics"  mythology. Govt. only needs to levy taxes to incentivize consumption (eg raise fuel taxes to promote adoption of EVS) or discourage consumption (eg to reduce tobacco consumption)

Quote:


You could claim that,  if you don't understand HOW money is created, to whom is granted  the privilege of creating it, and why it is granted to that privileged group.