If "half the budget is a result over the past decade to households aged oved 65", the the Turnbull government will start doing something about that in a couple of days time with vicious cuts to age pensions. And, boo hoo, younger households will pay only $200 per year over a normal working life in interest. $10,000 "over their lives" sounds worse for those wanting it to sound that way, but it is still a piddling amount. And of course " workers carry the weight of those on pensions". Has it not always been so? Did not today's age pensioners do the same for their forebears? And it is hard to believe that Gary has just realised that Labor - and all other politicians - are not interested in workers: just their bloated selves.

How about Gary Johns, pampered public servants and politicians go without something to help with the budget? And, what about non-Australian "refugees" bludging on us and, while we are at it, Aborigines getting sitdown money and benefits not available to other Australians. Too, foreign "aid" to despotic overseas governments could be given the chop. The costly connection to the corrupt United Nations could also be dispensed with.

Those who call for budget repair are betraying the workers!

Unlike in Keating's time, when Australia had plenty of foreign currency debt from before the dollar was floated, Australia's debt is now in Australian dollars. The government owns the Reserve Bank, so has unlimited credit in Australian dollars. Creditors have a 100% chance of getting their money back on time, and if any credit ratings agency's incompetent enough to suggest otherwise, the government should sue them for libel.

Rather than aiming to be debt free at some point in the future, the government should use fiscal policy the way monetary policy is currently used: loosened to promote economic growth, and tightened when inflation needs to be reined in.

Gary understands that our tax system is irrevocably broken, that no amount of tinkering at the margins is ever going to address the destiny of demography!

As fewer and fewer taxpayers try to carry more and more welfare recipients, all while trying to make good for myriad tax avoidance by the parasite class! And up there in plain view as we try to keep negative gearing, capital gain subsidies etc/etc. And then propose a lift in the GST rate to offset the cost of these arrangements!

Given Shorten has stood four square against all that, not him betraying those who create all our wealth!

Arguably, the only solution is eternally resisted, real root and branch tax reform!

Tax reform that treats all income equally, regardless of privilege or status, is an absolute must, if we are ever to restore equity and fairness!

Something the unproductive parasitical class will resist with their last breath! Even though such arrangement, would completely negate all tax compliance costs, thereby saving an averaged 7% currently reportedly ripped from the average bottom line!

Meaning an 18% stand alone expenditure tax as the only tax needed ever, would in real terms, impact on the current business bottom line as 11%!

Workers infinitely better off, given this simple effective measure entirely eliminates bracket creep, all while improving household incomes by as much as 20%? And address the poverty line and incentive to save, by simply limiting the tax take to expenditure only!

Even so, lots of (charity) perks and lurks would disappear, along with no longer viable business and or business practise.

Farmers bound to scream blue murder! Until some rationality is restored to foreign ownership, our energy and water policies, which if intelligent, would create new endlessly sustainable wealth creation opportunities, as well as virtually drought proof the joint!

Look, our dairy industries, all but destroyed, by diabolically dumb demagogues, while our clean green image transferred to recipient foreign competitor!

We are but one nation and "pork" policies that disadvantages one sector to the slight and temporary advantage of another, ultimately, disadvantages us all!
Alan B.

Any avoidable tax measure will be avoided! So we need something the biggest tax avoiders struggle to avoid and if the cost of paying your share is far less than the myriad costs of avoidance! So who in their right mind is going to opt for more costly avoidance!

Those who advocate for a continued GST? Invariably understand, it transfers tax liability from the better off to the disadvantaged!

And to his eternal shame, was introduced as alleged tax reform by a former fiscally incompetent, (quote unquote) PM!

Rather than raise the rate this abomination, merely masquerading as REAL tax reform, it should be abolished along with every other costly to administer revenue negative tax measure! In favour of an intentionally unavoidable, stand alone, single expenditure tax!

Which could be collected fee free, via the banking system, as part of the conditions of a banking licence?

We've invented myriad tax measures/structures, many of which cost the budget bottom line money, but are retained as part of the various fiefdoms that they create or enable?

We don't need empire building bureaucrats, nor their perceived predilection for costly, ineffective, triplicated centralization and correlation!

We need them gone along with their massive drain on shrinking finite taxpayer funds.

A referendum would probably be required to demobilize often corrupt, crisis riddled, incompetent, money burning state governments; [who'd fight tooth and nail for their survival,] and hand their roles to a combination of directly funded health and education autonomy, local councils and the Federal Government!

And without reducing social amenity or service one iota!

In the first instance we'd reduce the imposition on the budget bottom line by at least 70 billions per. And in the second instance, reduce it by as much as a currently routinely wasted 30%?

If management teaches just one thing, it teaches there' always always, a better way!
Alan B.

Fully funded welfare and pensioners or money wasting state governments? Take your pick! Given it's becoming increasingly obvious we can't fund both ADEQUATELY!

Euthanasia? What? Made compulsory for our oldies or entirely nonessential (roadblocks in the path of essential overdue progress) state legislatures?

I know which ripps more from the finite taxpayer pool! And or who has and continues to contribute more! Wisdom of the years, sage advice? And worth every penny!

State governments on the other hand, most notable for time and money wasting gridlock?
Alan B.

I must take to task the writers derision of Jack Lang, in my opinion Australia's greatest politician who was never Prime Minister (Shorten does not rate in the top 100). I have read all of Lang's books, books and publications about Lang, and spoken with those who lived through the Lang years (Great Depression included).
On the score of "repudiation of interest payments" under the 'Lang Plan'. At that time the NSW budget was larger than the Federal budget, the states held most of the taxation and spending rights. Unemployment was running at around 30%, wages had been servery cut, starvation for many was a reality. The debt incurred was substantially owed to British bond holder (bankers) for loans taken out by the States to finance the WWI war effort to defend the Empire, in reality Britain. In 1930 the Bank of England sent Sir Otto Niemeyer to tell Australia what it must do. Niemeyer's orders to Australia were two fold, one; *even more) severe austerity measures, and two; that at all cost the British bond holders must be paid! Lang had asked for a reduction in interest rates, in line with what had been granted to Canada, and was included in the Premiers Plan for internal interest, Niemeyer called for orthodox conservative economic measures. The alternative Lang Plan was more in line with measures for recovery put forward by the great economists John Maynard Keynes which was the bases of 'The New Deal' implemented by the Roosevelt administration in the US to lift that country out of the Great Depression.
It was certainly interesting times.