Don't mention the ....

[AstralTraveller]

Well, someone is going to mention the budget, then some troll will flame the thread and then the mods will have to shut it down. But before that happens perhaps us scientific type might be interested in the Australian Academy of Sciences' response to the budget (attached).

One nasty little surprise is the introduction of tuition fees for post-grads. These people have typically worked bl**dy hard for 4+ years on not-enough money and the financial strain is already showing when they start. Presenting them with a 'get a job or get more debt' option is not really bright when you remember that they are the engine room of Australia's research. The people in the labs with the gloves on are mostly (at least in the university sector) PhD candidates along with a few post-docs and only very few academics. While it's true that the students hope to get a good job when qualified, and so some would say they should be charged, if you were to pay wages for the work they do the cost would be at least 4 times greater. Hopefully it will be 'only' an increase in their HECS debt and not 'up front'. Never-the less it sends a poor message about the countries priorities. It also makes it harder for students from lower socio-economic backgrounds to rise to the top and so contributes to the stratification of society.

Cheers, and let's keep it civil.

[Renato1]

Yes, I can see that measure being very rough on PhD types, particularly those in obscure fields, where jobs don't open up very often (I'm thinking of the son of my wife's friend whose doctorate was in the field of study involving dinosaurs - took him quite a while to get a good job in his field).

However, I think they are unintended victims. I can think of several people I know who would have had a better life, had someone forced them into the workforce rather than letting them wallow away on the dole.

It will be interesting to see what the situation will be in 2040 and 2050. On the one hand, the poor sods will have to work till 70. On the other hand, heaps of baby boomers will be dying off and there will be a massive transfer of wealth to the next generation. By 2060, pretty much all the boomers will be dead - probably leaving the living as the richest people on the planet by a long shot, given that on a median basis, according to last year's Credit Swisse Wealth Report, Australians are currently the wealthiest people on the planet.

Personally, I don't think Mr. Hockey cut as hard as he could have. I just remember that back in 1999, when the Eurozone was formed, there weren't that many basket cases in Europe. But in a mere 10 years of over borrowing, many did themselves in. For six years we've been on that path, though we started from a much better starting point. And the slogans put out by his opponents - that current debt is only 12% of GDP, and so we are much better off than other countries - is misleading. Because most other countries don't have our federal system, we'd have to add the States' debts to the Federal debt to make a valid comparison. And that nearly doubles the debt percentage. We're still better off than most other countries, but not by the very comfortable margin that the 12% figure implies.

Regards,
Renato

[casstony]

The more harsh our government becomes, the more disenfranchised the lower socioeconomic groups become, the more we end up like the United States, and that's not a place I'd like to live. We visit there every couple of years and it's a competitive, dog eat dog, fearful society.

Many of our financial problems would disappear if natural economic cycles were allowed to happen. Periodic recessions are required to flush out malinvestment and keep the economy healthy.

[traveller]

The less said about the Feral Budget the better. I had to sift through quite a few budget papers as part of my job since early this morning (strong coffee).
Lots of hidden surprises, most of which won't be felt by the average punter until they do their tax return in 2015.
Bo

[Retrograde]

"An unprecedented $80 billion cut to health and education" when Abbott specifically ruled out any cuts to health & education prior to the election.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/federal-budget-2014-joe-hockey-hurts-his-way-into-history-20140513-387z6.html#ixzz31fEd9oZg

Tony and Joe seem to have gone insane. Slashing federal money to the states to force them to push for a GST increase to recoup it just to pay for schools and hospitals. Doesn't even get the budget back to surplus because almost all the money from cuts and tax increases has been given to big business. :mad2:

[multiweb]

They're both doing very well considering what they were left with. Just saw Hockey talk to the ABC press club. It was very good. Made sense. No bull, just the facts and numbers.

[PCH]

I loved the question the ABC's Sarah Ferguson put to Joe Hockey in their interview last night. She asked...

‘‘Is it liberating for a politician to decide election promises don’t matter?’’

Bless him. He was so gob smacked, he decided to elect not to answer the question.

Good question Sarah. My only nark is that, just like in a courtroom, they should be required to answer.

[Renato1]

I recollect the ABC being far more conducive to the Carbon Tax.
Renato

[FlashDrive]

:lol: ....

‘‘Is it liberating for a politician to decide election promises don’t matter?’’

Yeah ... I watched that to Paul ... had me laughing when she asked the question..... and the expression on Joe's face was ' priceless ' :lol:

Col.....

[Baddad]

It would take considerable courage for politicians to make it a breach of a law to break an election promise. Politicians are not brave. They have the best of both worlds. Early retirement, almost immune to law breaches. Even deciding their salaries. A protected species.:mad2: No way they will ever jeopardise their positions.

IMHO they are what some people call them. Poli (many) tics (blood sucking insect)

Unfortunately we do not have an alternative. Some are good and some.. Well That is better left unsaid.

If it can not become worse it must be able to improve. Here's hoping.:)

Cheers:)

[multiweb]

Chris Bowen, Sarah Fergusson, 'broken promises', etc.... the whole lot sound like a bloody broken record. :lol: They should join the war effort and tighten their belts like the rest of us instead of keeping talking endless sh|t that nobody cares about anymore. Things need to change to be sustainable. Plain and simple. Back to work.

There was an article on the ABC website this morning about some kids looking sad on photos in QLD because they were cuts in welfare. Bio: young bloke quits school at 16, un-employable, now blaming the gvt? Wtf? Seriously? Is public school that expensive that he had to drop out? :shrug: A future whinger in a couple of years who will blame everybody else for his mistake and expect his due.

[casstony]

Polarisation doesn't lead to a healthy and sustainable society. We need to be financially and socially responsible.

'Let them get jobs' shows the same lack of understanding as 'Let them eat cake'. This isn't the Australia of 40 years ago when kids chose which level to leave high school depending on which job they felt like doing. It's much tougher now. We need to help our youth not segregate them.

[multiweb]

Agree 100%. It's going to be much tougher for them. That's why every parent need to make sure their kids work hard at school to develop skills that are needed by prospective employers. I'm doing my bit for mine. 6yr degree at UNI which I pay out of my own pocket. The other is in year 10 and will keep going too the same way until they both get a job. My eldest is already working part time. I pay for mine. Why should I also pay for the ones who decide to quit school? You've mentioned responsibility. Is that the governments responsibility? Which in essence means mine, because that's my door they'll be knocking on to get funding.

[casstony]

Keep in mind Marc that your children likely have above average IQ parents and come from a functional household. Many kids don't have those advantages. It wouldn't matter so much if there were apprenticeships or traineeships to walk into as there once were. It's very difficult to pull oneself out of the muck without assistance.

[multiweb]

You must have me mistaken for somebody smart Tony. :lol: When I landed here after selling all the furniture and the car back home I had $1k in my pocket after buying a sh|tbox to drive around and look for work. Why did I come to Oz? Because there are so many opportunities here and the climate is good. My qualifications overseas didn't mean squat here so I started from scratch. I never got welfare or ask for any kind of assistance for work. My wife works full time too. It's not about how smart you are. It's about will. Some people must be bored sh|tless here. They have no goal, no focus, no motivation. That's a terrible way to live. Financial assistance only compounds the problem. Need to get them out of the house working so they get a taste of freedom and financial independence again. Responsibility will come next.

[casstony]

Again this comes to lack of understanding Marc. My wife works for the education dept trying to help kids who are not doing well at school for a variety of reasons, including intellectual disability, autism, behavioural problems linked to an unstable home life (drugs, physical abuse, sexual abuse, parent with clinical depression, etc), and goodness knows what else. Then there's another group of kids above this who aren't so badly off but still don't have what it takes to make it on their own.

The fact is there are a lot of kids who don't have the ability or drive necessary to make it in life and they need ongoing help (not money) to be able to function acceptably in school and have a chance of being self supporting after school.

My wife does a couple of hours unpaid overtime every day because the workload is greater than the available resources, and some of those resources are disappearing with the latest budget cuts.

[Baddad]

Hi Marc,:)

You are spot on. I have kids who are very motivated. Two of whom went to uni with very little assistance from me. The third was an SAS member and now a manager of a very large international company.

I never found it easy back in the "good old days" I believe the assistance that youth has available now is much better and there are more opportunities. However the lack of motivation has increased in young people and this is the problem.

Don't get me wrong. Most young people are motivated its just some slackos give the majority a bad name. The number of these slackos has increased. The gvt has the right idea in a few areas. Making it harder to get assistance will force them to get off their behinds.

The $7 for free GP visits will have the desired affect in reducing the number of trivial visits. Because if its not free anymore people will think twice before adding to the medical burden. I have seen, "Johnny needs a splinter removed and Johnny scraped his knee. It bleeds when he squeezes it.

While I was a child and had attended at the doctors for every time I leaked a little blood I'd be there 2 - 3 times a week. Sometimes more.

I say to them "Harden up sissy boy"

The more they are given, the more they take and the more they will demand.

End of rant.:)

Cheers:)

[multiweb]

Those extreme cases would be a minority and that's why we have safety nets in place. I agree with that and support it. But would it be fair to assume that most of the needed money goes to welfare cheats instead? They're the ones I'm talking about. The army is a good one for lost kids. Teach them discipline, teach them a trade, teach them a degree, sense of self esteem. They're recruiting. Loads of various opportunities, medical, engineering, heaps of choices that can make for an easy integration back to civilian work force.

[multiweb]

I agree with this. Paying for Doctor visits. in 94 it would cost me about $40.00 to see a GP back home. So as you say you don't go there for a nose bleed. Having said that, each GP practice is private. So it's natural selection. The good ones get the customers, the bad ones close doors. In turn the service you get for your 40 bucks was second to none.

Come to Australia, I was surprised to hear Medicare, Bulk billing, free, etc... That was foreign to me. There's no such things as freebee. :lol:

$7 is nothing really. It's gonna clear all the waiting rooms of all the bludgers for sure.

[Baddad]

Hey Marc,:)

Its not like it used to be. The Army that is. It is not easy to get in. They are a choosy bunch. Recruits are checked for minimum aptitudes, psychologically sound. They will be in charge of weapons.

However it is the attitude of people that needs to be improved like you said.
Not easy but it can be done like in reward and rebuke system.

Cheers:)

[strongmanmike]

:question:..... :scared: :bashcomp:

:rofl:

[mithrandir]

An additional $7 "gap" fee at the Drs isn't going to make me go hungry - they only bulk bill people with health care cards - but as a self funded retiree I don't get any of the perks the employed (like tax deduction for my private health insurance), the unemployed and OAPs get.

As for jobs, there are people who will never have the ability to do anything more intelligent than leaning on a council shovel. Sounds harsh but it is true. Jobs like that are disappearing. Forcing them to go to year 12 just delays when they start the dole and can disrupt the rest of the school.

Then there are the people who would do better leaving school earlier and going to TAFE, but we can see from the cuts how important the govt thinks TAFE is. Are you ready for $120K per uni degree per child?

[multiweb]

To spend that much on your education you'd think there is a good paying job worth that much on the other end, not like research on the color of feathers on a T Rex's arse during the Jurassic period, so you can pay the money back when you're in the work force. If you're not sure about it don't make the commitment. :P

[AstralTraveller]

T-Rex's arse feathers were obviously brown - no great mystery there. The colour of the rest of them is harder to guess. Oh .. and it didn't live during the Jurassic - it was late Cretaceous.

Seriously though, I think if research was limited to the certainty of a good job at the end of it the world would be a much poorer place, both culturally and scientifically. Certainly there would be much less astronomy research. We need that 'blue sky' research both because it has a track record of turning up something useful (eg electricity) and because of the beneficial effect on our consciousness. Yes, we also need practical, directed research but that is happening and is the great majority of the world's research effort.

It is also possible to do a good solid research project and still not find a job. Geologists find this all the time. One year the companies are recruiting second year students who still know jack and the next they are sacking people with PhDs and decades of experience. About 10 years ago ecologists were a dime a dozen. Many committed souls wanted to help 'save the planet' and it looked as though there would be jobs for them, but by the time they graduated the situation had changed. The problem they all face is the irrational anarchic society we have inherited. It's a constant wonder to me that we tolerate it.

[Retrograde]

You mean like Tony Abbott & his colleagues every day for the last 4 years? Now shown as liars and hypocrites like we've never seen.

You may not think $7 is much but to my mum who's an aged pensioner and has a heart condition, who has to go to the GP - then for tests - then back to the GP - then to the specialist - it's a great deal.


The war effort? You mean the war effort against fairness, honesty and accountability? Hockey doubled the deficit http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-06/has-the-government-doubled-the-budget-deficit/5423392 to invent a fake crisis to push this idelogical con-job on us.

[strongmanmike]

:cool::clap::clap:

[multiweb]

LOL - two more victims of the 'system'. Geez are you guys for real? :rofl:

[strongmanmike]

This is Pete in action (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/Dunking.jpg) Marc :thumbsup:

[multiweb]

... and? :question:

[strongmanmike]

Nothing :)

[multiweb]

See you at the SPSP Pavarotti. :P

[strongmanmike]

Dilegua, o notte! Tramontate, stelle! Tramontate, stelle! All'alba vincerò! Vincerò! Vinceròooooooooooooo! :stargaze:

:D

[KenGee]

I was going to comment but Marc will just give us another copy and paste of Liberal talking points. Golden shower economics and state sponsored nannies, thanks Tony.

[casstony]

Please impart your wisdom Ken - I'm willing to learn.

Is the debt associated with real estate not a major problem? If it is could past governments have avoided the problem?

[Starless]

Ditto!!

[stanlite]

I am sorry to say guys and girls this is a budget that was always going to happen at some point. Just because the deficit was "inflated" doesn't mean there isn't one. Eventually you have to rectify that. And that always means pain. If you rectify it early it means less pain later. Particularly when you consider some home truths.

1. there are going to be more old, non tax paying people in this country living longer with ever more serious quality of life concerns in the next 10-15 years (right about when we would have a serious budget emergency if we did nothing now).
2. there will be fewer than 2 working age people per welfare recipients (pensions/dole whatever) within my lifetime (I am mid 20's) unless radical changes are made to how we target welfare and how we tax people.

The problem with this country is the welfare base (those getting it) has become to broad. The tax base to narrow and the expectations the people put on government too high. We simply cannot given the projected aging in our population support the welfare society that has existed for the last 50 years. At least not without major reworking of either the tax system, or welfare or both.

I personally don't have a problem with any politician breaking a promise (as opposed to outright lying) it is foolish in the extreme to expect anyone to be able to forecast what they can deliver in the next 2 months much less 3 years. What matters to me is the ability of our elected reps to be able to make the call and walk away from a bad promise (as the Libs have done on somethings). The problem isn't with the pollies (well it is too I guess) its with us! We punish them at the ballot box if they admit they broke a promise even if they do so with good reason. Kinda creates a incentive for them to never answer a question straight if they know people are just going to lose their **** because it is different from what they said last week.. month... year ect ect. Now I am a liberal supporter I say it freely but I am also set to be one of the worse affected by this budget, I am unemployed (since September) under 30 and do not live near public transport, but i would support any budget, by any party (well maybe not Palmer lol), that attempts to rectify structural issues with the budget.

A good option that might be possible in a few years with help from technology is getting rid of income tax and moving to a wealth tax. Where you are taxed on your total wealth each year rather than earned wealth each year. This avoids tax loopholes like being paid in shares or cars ... ect.

[Renato1]

I was watching Paul Murray Live tonight who was passionately making the case for the $20billion medical research fund, that is to be funded by the co-payment on Doctor's, X-Ray, Pathology etc visits. He has been very active in raising money for research. He made the interesting point - when people are at charity events raising money for hospitals or medical research, the most common question is how come government doesn't do this?

And now the government is.

Cheers,
Renato

[AndrewJ]

The problem there is the wealthy would always have access to means to show that they dont have wealth, and pollies will always ensure that there are loopholes to jump through.
No pollie ( of any persuasion ) is going to bring in a system that allows themselves and their "influential backers" to be caught by it.

Andrew

[multiweb]

Nah... you guys go for it. Bring something constructive to the discussion. I'm entitled to my own opinion so are you. We don't have to agree on everything.


They taxed wealth in France years ago. They just move to Monaco or Belgium or wherever they don't get taxed as much. Some went as far as changing their nationality so it doesn't seem to work. It's harder to get out of Australia though. :lol:

Here's the latest (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/bill-shorten-on-the-budget-if-you-want-an-election-try-us-if-you-think-we-are-too-weak-bring-it-on/story-fni0xqrc-1226919292083?sv=68d6c60b4ce1f3b2ea 0aa17f11f45e84&&net_sub_uid=73501433). Pretty negative speech and bleak picture of the immediate future. But I don't hear any alternative or solution. Just political babbling. I don't care which side fix the mess we're in as long as it's fixed TBH. But I don't buy 'we'll look after you' and 'fair go speeches', I've heard enough over the past 6 yrs. I'd like to hear concrete planned solutions.

[stanlite]

But that is the thing people still have to have a paper trail to their wealth if they hide it with someone else or in some structure they still need a way to prove its their wealth otherwise anyone can take it. Even if they don't hold the wealth and they hide it with someone not working all that would happen is that person would be taxed.

In truth there is really nothing stopping anyone from forming their own one person company that hires themselves out to do work. Doing this you circumvent income tax by being a company then pay for everything as business expenses, thus no profits and no business tax. The only difference between the rich and the average man is knowledge and willingness to take the time to do it.

[multiweb]

If you are the owner of a pty ltd and take a wage let's say of $10k, you'd have to put $3k in taxes and $1.2k in super so you need to generate $14.3k of money + GST (1.4K). $15k gross will give you $10k nett. If you buy a business car it's a company asset, so not 100% tax deductible. You pay company tax. It is a common misconception from employed people to think that having a business allows to claim everything as business expenses. You still have to pay your taxes. And your super. When you're employed, your employer pays your super, and sick leave and holiday pay and also group tax because he's employing you. I don't get any sick leave or holiday leave. :)

[AndrewJ]

It also requires that the cost to the "collectors" is less than what would be recovered, and when you get to the wealthy, there are so many legal loopholes that its not funny. Funny how lawyers/politicians always seem to make laws that cant be enacted in a black or white manner :shrug:

As an example in this day and age, i regularly listen to the ABC when they give free legal advice to many people re "simple" unpaid debts and getting payment from people. In most cases the advice is you need to run a case in the magistrates court and unless the debt is more than 5thousand dollars or so, it will cost you more, and still no guarantee of getting paid.
Imagine the costs to pursue a rich operator who has set up complicated family trusts with nested family companies etc.
The forensic accounting costs, let alone legal costs would be horrendous.
I know who will end up with the money, and it wont be the collectors.

Andrew

[JJDOBBER79]

Tax wealth....... I dont believe Im hearing this. Large business is who employs everybody in this country. There is a lot of talk of looking after small business, what about big business? This is where all of our money comes from. Should they get significant tax breaks? IMHO they definately should. Lets look after them before they decide that its too costly to do business here and go offshore. As far as budgets etc, heres my 2c.

This is how it works, always has, always will;
Labour spend all of our money - Liberal save the money - Labour spend the money - Liberal save it etc etc etc.

I for one think this is great and should continue this way. Why? Because the end result is that we have the best country in the world. If anyone disagrees with that take a look at the european economies or the US. So this sytem, like it or not, works.

as far as getting us out of the s**t goes. Heres a radical idea. GET RID OF CGT!!!! Then everyone can actually make some money. It is counterproductive. We should be encouraging people to self fund their retirement so that they wont be a burden on the government......genius.

[cfranks]

I agree JJ. I remember when Hawke got in for the first time. One of his electioneering quotes was " Let me put it in words that even the Liberals can understand! THERE WILL BE NO CAPITAL GAINS TAX" I think it was not very long after the election that it was introduced.

Charles

[AndrewJ]

I reckon they both spend more than they earn ;),
but labor does get the nod as the biggest spender.
The big difference to me is the Liberals keep steadily selling the family silver so the purse doesnt "appear" to be so empty.
Dunno what the answer is, but based on recent experience, im sure politicians and "economists" arent it.

Andrew

[Renato1]

We already have wealth taxes.

All real estate is subject to council rates based on land value - that's a wealth tax.
Real estate outside the family home is subject to another wealth tax, called land tax.

And capital gains tax, is a wealth tax on the growth in wealth in all asset classes excluding the family home (family home is excluded for obvious reasons - if the price went up and you had to move somewhere else, you'd never be able to afford the same priced property).
Regards,
Renato

[JJDOBBER79]

Tax wealth....... I dont believe Im hearing this. Large business is who employs everybody in this country. There is a lot of talk of looking after small business, what about big business? This is where all of our money comes from. Should they get significant tax breaks? IMHO they definately should. Lets look after them before they decide that its too costly to do business here and go offshore. As far as budgets etc, heres my 2c.

This is how it works, always has, always will;
Labour spend all of our money - Liberal save the money - Labour spend the money - Liberal save it etc etc etc.

I for one think this is great and should continue this way. Why? Because the end result is that we have the best country in the world. If anyone disagrees with that take a look at the european economies or the US. So this sytem, like it or not, works.

as far as getting us out of the s**t goes. Heres a radical idea. GET RID OF CGT!!!! Then everyone can actually make some money. It is counterproductive. We should be encouraging people to self fund their retirement so that they wont be a burden on the government......genius.

[JJDOBBER79]

Posting the same thing twice was a mistake not an attempt to reiterate my point. Sorry.

[Octane]

You can edit the duplicate post and delete it, by going into the advanced section.

H

[Retrograde]

Despite the point that you shouldn't limit access to health today to achieve a potential health outcome tomorrow, I'd like to believe that this fund is as good as they say Renato.

Why is it that the government suddenly so interested in medical research when they are simultaneously ripping the guts out of CSIRO? Without more detail we can only guess.
I don't suppose Tony Abbott perhaps has friends in the pharmaceutical industry (http://theconversation.com/amgen-and-abbott-whos-that-on-the-pms-cycling-kit-18142)?

[casstony]

I'd be a lot happier with moderate Liberals running the country. AFAIK Turnbull doesn't have an ideological bent against the CSIRO, renewable energy technologies and the ABC. Abbott must be one of the most hated men in politics by both sides and he's an embarrassment to Australia in the same way that Bush was to the US.

[traveller]

Not fair to compare Abbott with Dubya, Bush was re-elected

[el_draco]

I haven't been able to find anyone who will admit to voting for this party, except for a certain mother in law, (nough said :rolleyes: ....); funny about that.

To all those who did, wonder what you think now of "Mr honesty, and no surprises". :mad2: I predicted EXACTLY what the last elections would produce on both a National and State levels (Tas). I just hope both are one term disasters and more people learn that if they want to vote at all, they ought vote for independents.... :confused2:

Scary thing is, despite being a totally loopy loop, Palmer has been talking some sense. OMFG!!! I actually said that!:eyepop:

[Renato1]

I'd be happy if the current Labor crew, Shorten and any of his possible successors like Plibersek, Bowen and Albanese looked anything remotely like the fiscally responsible former ALP leaders Hawke, Keating, Crean and Beazley. Or like Bracks and Brumby in Victoria.

But it's not always the case that Labor spends and Liberals save. The Liberals in WA have built up such a huge debt, they're moaning for an increased GST to get them out of strife.

As for Abbott, he's repaired relations in Asia which were mangled by his predecessors. And as for influence, when China decided to scrap its trial emissions trading scheme, it cited Mr. Abbott and the Coalition! And the political capital in Asia for leading the search for the missing jet cannot be underestimated.
Regards,
Renato

[el_draco]

Fascinating thing is we had this enormous income from a resources boom and both parties pissed it down the loo. We should have set up an enormous Sovereign Wealth fund and we'd be living off the interest now. Its a myth that Liberals save money. Costello spent huge amounts on bonuses and tax cuts but nobody seems to remember that.

Our system is as much a failure as much as most other countries. We are lead by self important liars = politicians = lawyers who have a manifest interest in *****ing at each other at our expense.

Every "election" they say one thing then turn around and do something else, blaming the opponent for not telling the true state of public affairs; (In the real world, that's fraud). Well folks, this time you elected a doozy but I doubt anyone will learn from the experience we are all about to receive.

[casstony]

I think we're almost in violent agreement here :), in that we need middle of the road, not left wing loonies or right wing ideologues.

[multiweb]

What we need is all the clowns in Canberra to stop this pointing fingers circus and work together. Put differences aside and move in the same direction for a change. Then we'll go somewhere. Leave the politics out of it and get on with the job. Money doesn't grow on trees.

[Renato1]

But don't forget - we are still the wealthiest country in the world on a median basis (2013 Credit Swisse World Wealth Report).

I actually noticed it last year when we were in Cinque Terre in Italy. In the train station, after the early rush, there were only seven people there waiting to buy tickets - my wife and I from Melbourne, another couple from WA, another couple from NSW and a woman from Queensland. That night we had dinner with a couple from Tamworth, and the people in the table next to us were from Tasmania.

I don't think we realise how good we have it down here, especially compared to the state of permanent austerity now in Europe, or of working like manics in Asia. I just want a government that takes steps to keep it that way.
Cheers,
Renato

[traveller]

Agree 100% Marc, BUT we have an adversarial system of government, not a cooperative system. 90% of our politicians are lawyers/career politicians who relish the thought of point scoring over each other's woes. The 24 hour news cycle is also driving this relentlessly for our entertainment...
Bo

[multiweb]

True, that doesn't help. Just putting more gas on the flame. Anyway it's going to be a real hard sale in the senate so we're likely to end up with a half assed budget again and go nowhere. Can't help people who don't want to be helped.

[AndrewJ]

And we are also one of the costliest places to live.
Its all relative
( Why do you reckon you were all overseas :lol: )

Andrew

[el_draco]

.... and the measurement is always in $ Hardly valid. One just about every other measure, we're deep in it. I'd love to see a measure of GDH rather than GDP. In that regard, we all pretty much need Valium.:shrug:

[casstony]

With our tremendous private debt we're in a very fragile state and both sides of govt worked with banks to create that problem. If China slows significantly and our housing bubble pops and the banking system becomes unstable we won't look much better than a lot of other countries.
I feel sorry for all the poor buggers conned into taking out massive house loans over the last two decades. We might keep chugging along or everything could suddenly collapse, only time will tell.

[Renato1]

You can use lots of different measures to measure wealth, like GDP per person (which makes Lichtenstein the second richest country on the planet), or average wealth per person, which puts lots of other countries ahead of us.

But for the average person in the country, Credit Swisse's median measure is the most accurate and relevant.

Basically, the richest 10% of Australians own 50% of the wealth. In comparison, in America they own around 75%, and in the UK they own around 84%. And it get worse in other countries.

So it matters little to the average citizen if a country has the highest average wealth or highest average GDP per person, as that average is bumped up by billionaires who own most of it.

The median measure shows that governments in Australia of both persuasions have for the most part set things up to spread the wealth much more evenly among the population.
Regards,
Renato

[Renato1]

Hi Andrew,
I spent three months in one of the relatively wealthy regions of northern Italy last year. Pretty much everything there, except for potato chips, peanuts, spirits, liqueurs, cigarettes and Pepsi, is significantly dearer than here. And their typical wages are significantly lower than here. I kept scratching my head on how they made ends meet.

And after three days of driving around in Switzerland, I decided it was way dearer than Italy, and got out of there.

And that was at a time when our dollar was really high (70 Euro cents to the AUD). I've been there when it was 48 Euro cents to the AUD, and that was a case of ouch.

There are plenty of costlier places to live, than in Australia.
Cheers,
Renato

[Renato1]

Last I saw, in sharp contrast to the Gillard and Rudd governments, average Australians did the opposite and took the opportunity to pay off a very large amount of household debt. It still hasn't recovered to the level pre GFC.

And given the very real concerns which you cite, I suspect they'll be wary of splurging big on debt for quite a while yet.
Regards,
Renato

[el_draco]

You missed the point entirely. Being wealthy in $ terms is of zero value if it kills you getting there, results in the devastation of your environment and the destruction of a way of life. Our environment is on the verge of systemic collapse and the box heads in Cantberra and the individual states seem incapable of doing anything other than screwing everyone over.

When I was a kid, the Great Barrier reef was a wonder of the world to be protected at all costs. Now, substantial amounts of it is DEAD and the rest will surely follow in the pursuit of the all mighty buck. I could swim in the Murray without needing medical attention afterwards and the area where I grew up produced fruit without having to pump saline water out from under the trees...

Right now, both levels of moron government seem adamant that they'll attack the Tassie rainforests despite every argument against it. Why? Simple brainless self-interested egotistical short sighted spite.

Australia wealthy? "Impoverished" would be a more accurate description and its gonna get much worse unless we stand up against the scum in the parliaments of this country. :sadeyes:

[casstony]

They haven't paid off a large amount - they don't have the capacity to pay off a large amount.

http://2.static.australianindependentbusin essmedia.com.au/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/Keen2.png?itok=rDMEHaXN


http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/8/5/economy/whos-responsible-australias-debt-crisis

[Kunama]

It seems people are in general very quick to blame someone else for being in debt hundreds of thousands of dollars. It is not the banks' fault that people overestimate their ability to pay off loans. The banks are only promoting their 'goods' as any other business would. You don't rush out and buy a top of the range Mercedes even if you see them advertised on TV, yet people regularly buy champagne homes on beer budgets.

Too many people take the bank's advice for wealth creation, they are really only interested in creating wealth for their shareholders. Get independent financial guidance and investment advise, don't blame banks for doing their job well.
Yes the 'home loan' is a necessary evil for most in society, the wise ones get it paid off as quickly as possible and to do that make many sacrifices.
Personally I worked shiftwork for 20 years as well as running a weekend business and spent very meagrely on 'entertainment' until my mortgage was repaid (30 yr loan repaid in 10 years).

The nature of government spending in Australia is to hit the public hard in the first year so you can buy them lollies in your last year to get re-elected, it matters not whether they be Labor or Liberal, they all do the same thing and each election the donkey voters fall for the rhetoric.
Then at the next budget the cycle continues.

One thing for sure, you cannot and you should not expect that there will be an age pension to feed you in old age, sure there will be something so one won't starve but we should all plan for a self-funded retirement.

[Renato1]

Tasmania has the highest unemployment, highest youth unemployment, and lowest standard of living of any State, despite being subsidised to the hilt by the rest of the country, mainly because it has killed off a lot of jobs for the sake of many dubious environmental causes.

I suspect many people would be happy that the rest of the country hasn't followed the example set by Tasmania.

The Barrier reef has been going to die for the 50 years that I can remember, and it is still going strong. Last time I was at Echuca, people seemed to be happily water skiing and swimming in the Murray without ill effect. The effects of salinity is a problem resulting from irrigation, but if they hadn't had irrigation, well, you wouldn't have lived there.

The notion of the Australian environment being of a state of "devastation" is pure hyperbole.
Regards,
Renato

[multiweb]

Too true. I hammered mine as quick as I could. I'm happy now I'm out of debt I have more options and help the kids. Imagine going into retirement with a mortgage. :scared: Another thing great about this country is that banks will lend you money here so you do have the opportunity to buy your own place. Back home you get jack squat if you have no existing asset or a high paying job. People forget that they have it easy here.


:lol: I had that figured out when I was living in France. In oz you can setup SMSFs which is great, not that easy back home. I'll now have a better life in retirement that I did all my working life. Just worked my ass off. Looking forward to chill out and travel around with the missus. :sunny:

[AndrewJ]

Gday Marc


I sure hope you are right, but i really fear the govt will start to tinker with super in a few years when they realise its the only big pot of money left.
I can see them tightening up how much you will be allowed to draw out based on age, as well as grabbing the residual when you die.
They wont be able to resist
( I hope i am wrong, but i dont think so )

Andrew

[el_draco]

You still miss the point and you should read some scientific journals and a few historical texts as well.

1/ We get Blue Green algae blooms in the Murray regularity, 1.1 million truck loads of salt flow down it every year and it looks and often smells like a sewer. (lived there!) It flows upside down, when it flows, thanks to invasive species such as Euopean carp and the famous wonderful Murray cod is almost GONE!

2/ The direct damage to the GBR through over development and run-off alone are well documented, let alone the follow on effects of the Crown of Thorns, coral bleaching through climate change and the additional burden of crap flowing off the QLD coast as the population continues to grow insanely. (By the way, I went there for the first time in 30 years a couple of years back, and didn't even recognise the place!!)

3/ Tasmania is a small state with a small population and that is an disadvantage when dealing with some challenges. Its also located about as far South as you can get and our "sea highway" is problematic at best. However, as part of a federation where we are supposed to support each other, we need extra funding in some areas. I believe QLD, SA, NT and WA have been in the same place on occasion, and quite recently at that. I also remember paying a QLD flood levy because the pollies couldn't be bothered insuring against flood... We shouldn't throw stones in glass-houses.

Its very interesting that mainlanders, (of which I was once one), like to bag out Tasmania, yet also love our wines, salmon, world class Whiskey, cheeses, meats, seafood etc, etc, and use the opiates we produce after surgery. Of course, a large number of mainlanders also like to visit the rainforests we have fought to protect for 30 years... Funny about that. :shrug:

Perhaps we should follow the mainland example; strip and degrade our forests for short term gain, or maybe charge mainlanders a "look we didn't screw our environment visitor fee" :rolleyes:

Of course, after 30 years of standing up to corrupt poliies and companies down here, most of he world has caught up to backward Tasmaina and nobody will actually buy the wood earmarked for logging because it doesn't meet Forest Stewardship standards. Funny about that as well :shrug:

The forestry debate is fascinating. We had peace here before the liberals got involved. Even the loggers came to the table at the end. Tasmanians want a sustainable forestry industry rather than a slash and burn culture... At a recent rally in the Upper Forentine defying the govt, 2000 people showed up after driving 100+ kms from Hobart on a wet and cold day. Amongst them, loggers, oh, and mainlanders. Its a complex issue...

Its hard to justify trashing all our specialty timbers to establish mono-cultures devoid of a range of important species used in boat building and fine furniture manufacturing, for example. Apart from the loss of biodiversity, (certainly not a dubious cause I think), its simple bad form to do it. On my block I found the outline of a tree stump almost 4m in diameter. Wish my son could have seen it alive but he does get to see the 60m high tree I call "el captain"... because the cable loggers couldn't get to it. Imagine what must have been at Sherwood near Melbourne 150 years ago!

Then of course, you probably didn't know the forestry industry in Tassie had been shedding thousands of jobs on a regular basis prior to the forestry confrontation. Automation was part of it, the ability to rape Indonesian and Amazonian forests without as much scrutiny was another. Interesting :question:

Regardless, you are quite correct in saying Tassie has problems, just like the other states, and it ain't helped by incompetent moronic pollies.... I completely agree with you in relation to the youth and general unemployment levels here. Gawd, we have some bluggers here, but I remember seeing a ****e load of young blokes surfing mid week at Maroochydore as well....

Part of that problem is federal policy. Why work when someone else will "pay" you? Both major species of polly have encouraged that one. Another issue is the lack of accountability... all supported either directly or indirectly by govt. The problem is, we are stuck in 19th century thinking, "rip it down, dig it up, exploit it" and that thinking is almost done with in many parts of the world. To develop, new industries for the future, you need leaders with real vision, beyond the electoral cycle farce, and an education. You have to work at both which goes back to the first point... Please don't blame teachers for that one, its systemic and becoming a generational issue. Oh, and its gonna get a whole lot more expensive to go to uin as well...

Before bagging Tassie though, do some research mate; the reality is a little more surprising than you may think. That's why I now live here, and not there...

Rom

[casstony]

The other side of that coin is that easy money leads to asset bubbles, funded with excess borrowing, necessitating reduced economic activity in future to deal with the debt. Governments don't want reduced economic activity so they drop interest rates further, stimulate the economy with borrowing or printing and then we end up where the world is now.

Money needs to be correctly priced, not too hard or too easy to get.

[JJDOBBER79]

The real issue is that people by nature are self interested. Why do I have to pay that? Why do I have to pay this? Why doesn't he have to pay it?
Most people fail to see the big picture which is...
If/when we get the country in a good economic state, EVERYONE MAKES MONEY!!!! Yes, even those on welfare. I bet none of the self interested people who are complaining about the budget put mr rudds 1k cheque back in the envelope and returned it to him. There's no such thing as a free lunch people. We are now receiving the bill + interest. I, by the way didn't receive either of the payouts because apparently I earn too much. Ooops.... There I go being self interested. Anyway, I see someone started a thread that has religion in the title, can't wait to get on board that next.

[el_draco]

Love it... I gave my $1k cheque to charity, also earn to much for a free "pay" though I'll be stuffed if I know how, and..... the religion thread is spam.... There, you're disappointed again!!! :rofl::rofl::rofl:

Rom :hi:

[multiweb]

I'm just gobsmacked how the media campaign polarized on who's a bast4rd and who's fair in the following of the budget announcement. I mean we all know we're in the deepest sh|t ever right?... apart for people in denial. But the focus is now on who's more popular again and polls galore. Really? What gives? If they don't like what they're hearing what's the alternative? More spending? And who's gonna pay? Us again? LOL - talk about love for punishment. No brain or short term memory.

[Retrograde]

No we're not (and here's some reasons why):

1) Our debt to GDP ratio (the correct measure) has been higher in the past.
2) The USA hasn't had as low a debt to GDP ratio as us since....... 1918!
(yes the 2nd world war, the space race, being a 20th century global superpower: all achieved with a higher debt to GDP ratio than we have at present) The USA's current problems are far more recent in origin.
3) Gross debt is not a true measure of debt - it's like adding up all your credit card spending and ignoring repayments & in reality to do with the size of the government bond market. It has just become the Coalition's measurement of choice since scary debt numbers became their no.1 political tool. Net debt is the true measure: we should all learn the difference.
4) What's printed in the Daily Tonygraph (aka the Tele) is not news - it's propaganda.
5) Spending in this budget is actually up over the last 3 Labor (post GFC) budgets. It's not fixing anything but actually making things worse.

[multiweb]

Oh good, all is well then. I'll tell my son not to worry. It's all laid out for him now. :thumbsup:

[Starless]

None so blind as those that will not see.

[stanlite]

response to your points

1. yes it has been higher in the past but we have had plans to lower them or good reason for it to remain high (eg. war, depression, recession) which we presently do not have. Presently at just below trend growth we should be running budget neutral if your comparing us to the past.

2. Comparing us to the USA is a fallacy firstly we don't run the world police force if that didn't exist there is a case to be made that their national debt would be spread across the world in higher international defence budget spends.

The issue isn't to do with our debt level really its to do with our bond market obligations (interest rates on said Debt) for Australia the long range average rate on this is 4% compared to 1-2% for the USA and 1% for the Germans. On this simple measure their Debt ratio can be double to triple our level for the same annual cost (interest bill). Therefore, looking at our 20% net debt is essentially the same as the USA's 60% net debt (they have an 80% gross debt) obligations from an interest payment perspective.

3. net government debt stands at about 20% of GDP - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-13/joe-hockey-correct-on-australia-debt-and-spending/5310736

mentions the net debt in a graph.

4. Didn't see the article ... probably is propaganda all commercial news is in some way or form.

5. true spending in this budget is higher than last year (indeed all previous budgets) in dollar terms. What has been done is reduced the rate of increase in spending year on year.

eg. instead of the average increase in spending for the last 3 labor budgets which where about 3.7% this one is (i think) only about 1.76% which is slightly below forecast (i stress forecast) increase in revenue (about 2.2%).

So nothing is technically being cut in an overall sense (i am talking budget spending increase or decrease) just the growth is being slowed. This is why the government is saying it isn't cutting education or health spending (it isn't) but the states are saying they are cutting 80 billion (it is money across the forward estimates that won't be sent because of a reduction in the annual increase.) so for example health funding instead of being 126 Billion in 10 years time will be 92 billion compared to the 73 billion being paid to the states today. (note these health numbers are made up figures to demonstrate a point, may not represent actual health spending :P )

[Retrograde]

Sorry I missed your reply due to being away at SPSP etc.
Thanks for your well considered response.

1 - There was a plan to return to surplus. PEFO (released by treasury during the caretaker period so about as unbiased as you can get) had us returning to surplus in 2016/17 whereas the current budget has us still in deficit in 2017/18 - it has made things worse by such actions as giving un-needed tax cuts to mining companies & large corporations (like our record-profit making banks).

2 - the comparison was just to illustrate there is no 'budget emergency' just like there wasn't in the US in 1918. If there was surely they wouldn't have been able to go on & become a 20th century superpower?

3 - no argument there

4 - agreed (but the Tele has taken it to new partisan heights)

5 - I was talking about spending to GDP ratio. If you look in the budget papers at 10-6 & 10.7 you can see the spending to GDP ratio: http://budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/bp1/download/BP1_BS10.pdf

Labor in 2010/11, 2011/12 & 2012/13 spent 24.6, 25.0 & 24.1 % of GDP (avg 24.57%)
Liberals in 2014/15, 2015/16 & 2016/17 will spend 25.3, 24.8 & 24.7 % of GDP. (avg 24.93%)

(You can't compare to 2013/14 numbers because Hockey doubled the deficit by actions such as giving $8.8b to the RBA: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-06/has-the-government-doubled-the-budget-deficit/5423392)