Elementary mathematics, Arjay. It's called compound interest.

>>I see no evidence of the $4 billion costing $18 billion unless they had no intention of paying any interest<<

There was no interim payment schedule, just the lump sum at the end of the term of the loan. The interest rate was proposed to be 7.92%. Open up a spreadsheet, plug in the numbers and you'll find your evidence.

The originally proposed sum was $4 billion, at 2.5% the commission on that would have been $100 million.

The second attempt was for $2 billion, after the first deal collapsed.

>>So it is pure conjecture on the media's behalf and yours to say you knew all the details since the loans never even got to the negotiation stage let alone being secured by Kemlani<<

Der.

Nobody knew "all the details", Arjay.

That was the point. If it had been straightforward and above board, there would have been more informed discussion at the time, and more questioning that would have exposed the scam earlier. As it was, some gullible saps were sucked in for a while, and looked very foolish when it hit the fan.

>>Their real crime was going outside conventional sources of loans that excluded Western Bankers<<

Replace "real crime" with "naive stupidity", and you have it just about right.

I think we can trust in the fact that "naive stupidity" never comes into a political decision, although it serves our politicians' purposes to make it appear as if it does.

Instead there are various circuitous manipulative manoeuvrings at work, in order to fool the people into believing that Labor, Liberals and Greens are not all working towards the establishment of a Green global communist government. Hence the Tax on Air, which will never be repealed by any of them.

In the case of Paul Keating making superannuation compulsory for everyone, this might have been okay if it had been set up to look after every Australian equally, and if bank robbers had not been left in charge of the kitty.

An association with the United Nations might also have been okay, if we had not let them overrule our decisions on tariffs and trade, along with numerous other infringements upon our national sovereignty.

Now we no longer seem to be able to get their greedy mitts out of our kitty. Only days before Wayne Swan gave $7 billion to the IMF, I saw its leader on ABC24 asking for more and saying it would not be going to Greece. Now I am told that Wayne Swan has pledged an extra $5 billion.

Our leaders are like magicians, making you watch one hand so you don't notice what other is doing, which is really the one you should be watching.

When there are no problems, they create some lest you see what they are really up to.

Yes, very wise words from you, Phooey.

I think most people would be aware that the Greens have been driving both of the major parties since the inception of Greedpeace (not a typo) around 1970, bolstering the communist global financial agenda which has been in place since the end of World War II.

I'm sure Julia Gillard never planned on sending asylum seekers to Malaysia. While all of the sham arguing and fighting was going on, the government was setting up a plan to roll out a red carpet wide enough for a herd of elephants to stampede across, and putting in place a Community Hospitality Scheme at taxpayers' expense.

Meanwhile an increasing number of jobless, homeless and starving Australians are taking to the streets, with a measly $4.00 increase in Newstart Allowance.

Please give generously to The Salvation Army which is conducting its annual appeal this week. Your country men and women are relying on you for their survival.

People who break political promises should never ever be re-elected! Or engage in endless non core pre-election promises, that are promptly dumped, within days of the election result.
The conformation bias seems alive and well in almost every post; and the assertive article?
That said, Labour could have done better. The school building funds would have been far better spent in infrastructure spending. The best infrastructure would have been income earning very rapid rail links. Other than that, some low cost public housing that still produced rental returns that grew with the CPI, would have insured that somebody other than the taxpayer paid the bill.
Significant low cost housing would have kept the tradies busy enough; albeit, forced to become just a little more competitive; and, would have been a good economy growing/saving outcome. Moreover, $2,000.00 a week rents, would likely be impossible, if the building program focused first on areas of unsustainable high rents or serious housing shortages?
I don't see Labour winning the next election, and given the ever worsening state of the global economy, why would they wouldn't want to?
Those that want a returned coalition? Be careful what you wish for, given, you probably will have cause to seriously regret that outcome; given the world is still trying to absorb 64 trillion dollars worth of worthless derivatives; and, the Howard Govt created a structural deficit of around thirty billion, through unaffordable tax breaks for the better off! Tax breaks, which can only ever be controlled by greatly reduced welfare; albeit, welfare for the rich is likely to actually grow, given that seems to be the coalition forte or way? Rhrosty.

This govt is not clever enough; given a clever govt, would have completely reformed the dog's breakfast our tax system has become, in favour of a single stand alone expenditure tax. As a single tax and the only tax taken, the first result would have been the end of compliance and reconciliation; and any and all associated costs, which currently rip around 7% from the bottom line.
Set at just 4.8%, a simple single stand alone, unavoidable expenditure tax, would increase real revenue by around 25%. This would mean that the govt would no longer be compelled to borrow up to 100 million a day to remain operational; given the tax receipts would become immediately available, rather than locked away for up to 12 months, due to reconciliation imperatives.
The repeal of all the other govt imposts, would add around 30% to the averaged bottom line for all Australian based enterprise and as much as 25% to most households. [And, basically paid for by previous avoidance and or, avoiders.]
The subsequent increase in household disposables, would allow the immediate imposition of a non contributory 15% compulsory super, leaving 10% as increased discretionary spending/saving.
Furthermore, tiny adjustments of the tax scale, region by region, would alone control both inflation and or stagnation; meaning, interest rates could be progressively lowered until they literally turbocharged the economy! Rhrosty.