I'm delighted that you could join us here, Saul.

I don't know enough about economics to know whether or not your proposal is a good one. It makes sense to me, though. Some of the criticisms in here seem to me to be largely red herrings. Whether it is ethical or not, whether or not we are being lured deeper and deeper into an international capitalist authoritarian plot seems irrelevant to me.

The fact is that Australia is making money and seems to have no idea what to do with it. Secondary to this is the fact that the current trend of making money has an end-date. An ill-defined end-date, but an end-date nonetheless. Sooner or later, either supply or demand has to dry up. If demand dries up first, it's entirely possible that another market will emerge. If supply dries up first, we need to hope that we haven't put all our eggs into one basket. Our exports are based on something we have - not on something that we are producing. It's like spending an inheritance rather than an income: eventually, our entire inheritance will be spent, and if it is not spent wisely, there will be some hungry days to come. If it is spent wisely - to generate an income - then the good times could well keep on rolling.

What concerns me, then, is that there seems to be no long-term plan for the profits of the current boom. There are many plausible explanations for this: one that keeps coming up is that politicians are reluctant to look beyond the current term. Infrastructure spending is all well and good if it has a plan, and if that plan isn't based entirely on current trends. Nice highways and railways to and from the mines are great, but using our collective profits from the mines to generate new means of earning seem even better to me.

Of course, all of this is merely my opinion. Comments and criticisms are always welcome!