please help us chris lewis is threatening to do more basket weaving, please ensure 75% of your references are from newspapers as usual

"Our current debt is 10% of GDP compared to around 80% of the
USA and the UK and around 35% of Canada."

Debt is here:

http://www.aofm.gov.au/

Currently $257 billion.

GDP is here:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/gdp

2012:
$1.371 trillion

Debt is therefore .237/1.371 x 100 = 17.3%

What's a lousy 7% with the labore party and it's pixie supporters

This may clarify things for the doomsayers:

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/03/27/heres-the-real-story-of-australian-debt/

Lexi, you have no idea and neither does your link; productive debt which produces a return greater than the investment is good; the labore debt is the other kind; there is nothing to show for it other than a dubious NBN which arguably is already superseded technology.

The Crikey piece claims that running surpluses during the mining boom, which insulated Australia during the GFC for reasons I explain above and which labore groupies like yourself ignore, would have increased unemployment. This is stupid for at least 2 reasons.

Firstly, the way Swan spent his money meant absolutely no lasting employment occurred; secondly the debt it created meant the government has to borrow and repay to cover the debt; that means funds for private investment of the more lasting kind had to compete for funds with the profligate government.

This is basic economics and the witless cargo cult devotees of the labore/green cult cannot even understand this.

I don't doubt for a millisecond that economics is infinitely more involved than it first appears, however there are some Level 101 issues that gubmunts generally, and more particularly socialist ones, have never grasped. First and foremost is the inescapable fact that one cannot possibly spend more than one earns without eventually ending up in deep poo. Secondly, throwing money at lost causes like attempting to buy votes is rarely going to end well. Adding insult to injury by siphoning off a half-billion dollar slush-fund that rightfully should have gone toward the budget deficit and we get a clue how duplicitious these turkeys really are. Thirdly, having a certifiable lunatic treasurer & a couple of 'interesting' feminist females, none of whom have a millisecond of business experience, all running in frantic circles like headless chooks doesn't exactly make for a well organized gubmunt. Fourthly, far too many different cooks in the kitchen, all screaming for their own supper, means the 'customers' miss out. The mob of utter dumbclucks belong the red-headed witch have taken the typical ALP ineptitude to a whole new level, ready & waiting for a carbon-copy Newman / Seeney / Nicholls clone to arrive on the scene and commence World War 4.

Bonjour,

@cohenite, re: “His main point is Swan is a genuis for getting Australia through the GFC.”

Yes. Rudd, Swan, Tanner and Wong. Took Ken Henry’s advice – “Go early, go hard and go households!"

No-one went as hard as Australia, so no other nation averted a recession then difficulties. Poland came second – also averted two negative quarters – but lower quantum and speed.

Presented here: http://www.oecd.org/economy/outlook/42421337.pdf

See figure 3.2 and figure 3.3 middle graph.

Re: “Swan gave $21 billion to households via $900 gifts to get us through the GFC.”

Correct. Then rapid infrastructure spending in every community. Worked as Henry, Stiglitz, Krugman and others predicted – no unemployment blow-out, just one negative quarter, productivity, production, incomes, savings all up, inflation down.

Re: “has managed to create a gigantic debt for no good reason; it could have lived within its increasing revenue and now be in good shape”

No. Doesn’t work that way. Australia was 12th-ranked economy in 2007. The other 11 stronger economies all “lived within their revenue” and all ended up going backwards badly. Australia zoomed to the top. Still forging ahead.

@Lexi, re: “Australia has the gold triple A rating. Interest rates are low and our economy is the envy of the industrialised world.”

Precisely! Love the poem.

@ShadowMinister, re: “Notably Whine Swan's expenditure exceeded the budget by $4.2bn which was entirely within Labor's control.”

Yes. Still scope for increased borrowings and taxes. So spending doesn’t need to be constrained to the point where it will send the economy backwards or lose jobs – as happening elsewhere.

Re: “It is fishy how revenue over forecasts almost always happen during Labor governments.”

Hmmm. Remember the Fraser years, SM?

Re: “If the coalition had been in charge, the response to the GFC would have been a smaller expenditure (about half) that achieved the same outcomes ... If you have evidence that refutes this, then please show it.”

Evidence is those countries which did exactly that – had smaller expenditure than Australia’s. Plain to see. All went backwards badly. Except Australia and Poland.

Refer OECD paper, SM.

Cheers,