this 'sweet spot' if it is to be more than a passing phase, must take considerations of equity on board. Before it ends, our challenge is perhaps, in this order, to end poverty by eliminating homelessness, illiteracy, and prejudice. If such an achievement were to happen, and endure, it would be far more outstanding than any amount of stuff dug out of the ground.

But if we squander this moment we have, we will surely rue it, and our grandchildren as well, that we had the chance to achieve something truly wonderful, but blew it because of our shortsightedness, selfishness and ever growing gambling addiction.

We have but this brief moment only, the only moment we will ever likely have.

True and correct, where a sticking point is Australia is chock full of knockers, they only live for the moment and worry about tomorrow when it happens. Poker machines should never have been let loose, surely there is enough ways to waste your money other than poker machines. Now they are part of revenue, and that is going to be very hard to hunt down.

So long as this does not involve expanding the financial services sector again. We should also be more transparent as to which industries are getting industrial and corporate welfare so we can determine real value to the economy.
I see little value in propping up private insurance using taxpayer funds when there are so many more productive industries that could be supported.
If you were to rank our essential services and skills, then create another list ranked by personal income then the two lists would be almost complete reversals....rewarding profiteers and inflation riders whilst screwing teachers, scientists, engineers, etc is hardly a recipe for wealth growth!
By outing the parasites we can approach real productivity, not the "profit per worker" measure that ignores vertical integration, foreign ownership and the value of outputs.
BTW. History shows the wealth equality is essential to national stability and growth...will the media and "economists" please keep this in mind when the next "Neo-Liberal" crowd starts up pushing for more "rational" economics, (or God forbid) the "trickle-down" theories?