The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > What skyrocketing debt? > Comments

What skyrocketing debt? : Comments

By Alan Austin, published 16/8/2013

For its increased debt Australia has to show new roads, railways, energy and water infrastructure, improved school facilities, insulation, social housing, defence housing and other public assets.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. Page 14
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. All
Alan you can be quite insensitive at times. The media did not fabricate the deaths of four young men during the pink bats fiasco. The coroner laid that at Rudds door.
Posted by imajulianutter, Tuesday, 20 August 2013 10:14:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://undergrounddocumentaries.com/the-true-cost-of-health-care-full-lecture/

abc FACT* check
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-19/joe-hockey-exaggerates-debt-figures/4897264

Debt going to $400 billion'

On Mr Hockey's claim that Labor's legacy will be debt "going to $400 billion", ABC Fact Check consulted the Treasury's Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook released on August 13.

It contains a figure almost that large, $370 billion, which represents Treasury's debt projection at the end of the four-year forward estimates period. That is, it is the projected debt for 2016-17.

The Treasury projection Mr Hockey chose to describe Labor's legacy was its figure for gross debt.

The $370 billion figure in this year's PEFO refers to Commonwealth Government Securities (CGS), or government bonds, on issue. This is what economists and governments refer to as gross debt.

In contrast, the figure Mr Hockey chose to describe the Coalition’s legacy was its figure for net assets – that is, assets less borrowings.

To make a comparison using like-for-like, Mr Hockey should have used Treasury’s projection for net debt – that is, borrowings less assets.

For the 2013-14 year, Treasury forecasts net debt of $184 billion. At the end of the forward estimates period in 2016-17, it projects net debt of $217 billion.

We left the country with net assets of $70 billion, where if we are elected on the 7th of September we inherit debt going to $400 billion.
Joe Hockey

To make a correct claim, Mr Hockey could have said: We left the country with net assets of $31 billion where if we are elected on the 7th of September we inherit net debt of $184 billion going to $217 billion.

When the Coalition left office in 2007, gross debt was $59 billion (and was more than outweighed by government assets, resulting in net assets of $31 billion). Currently, gross debt is $268 billion.

Another correct claim Mr Hockey could have made is: We left the country with gross debt of $59 billion where if we are elected on the 7th of September we inherit gross debt of $268 billion going to $370 billion.

Either way, the change is less dramatic than Mr Hockey claims.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-19/joe-hockey-exaggerates-debt-figures/4897264

http://undergrounddocumentaries.com/fiat-empire-full-version/
http://12160.info/main/mobilepage/desktopMode?target=%2Fxn%2Fdetail%2F2649739%3ABlogPost%3A1290901
http://www.moneynews.com/FinanceNews/Detroit-banks-derivatives-swaps/2013/08/16/id/520795?s=al&promo_code=148D4-1

http://undergrounddocumentaries.com/making-a-killing-the-untold-story-of-psychotropic-drugging-full-version/
Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 20 August 2013 12:26:16 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foyle,

Your trite explanation of Keynesian theory is ignorant that of the money dished out a large portion was put in savings not spent, and the vast majority of the rest was spent on electronics with the money flowing overseas. The estimate of the value of increased economic activity was about 1% of the cash doled out. i.e. about $8.9bn of the $9bn was wasted.

Similarly investigation of the school halls debacle showed that the buildings done for public schools cost about 2x what equivalent buildings done for private schools cost, that most buildings were far from being top priority issues for the schools, and that the resultant shortage of construction labor for non government work, meant that the scheme was way beyond what was required to save jobs and productive construction was delayed.

Finally, your comment on sovereign money issuing governments has been proven wrong many times in pre war Germany, Zimbabwe and Greece. This leads me to believe that you have no economic qualifications whatsoever. I would recommend you study the economics of Keynes and Friedman before some of the "fringe" economists.

AA,

It could be easily argued, especially in hindsight that the 2007 ranking of Australia 12th behind the USA, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Japan, Norway, Singapore, Finland, Iceland, Taiwan and Luxembourg was a serious miscalculation using the wrong measures, and that Australia's economy and economic management based on low debt, strict banking regulations, healthy balance of trade, and showing near record consistent growth for more than a decade, was far more secure and stable, than any of the other supposedly better countries.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 20 August 2013 1:31:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Greetings again,

@Imajulianutter, re: “The media did not fabricate the deaths of four young men during the pink bats fiasco.”

First, it was not a fiasco. Refer:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/we-really-must-talk-about-the-pink-batts/

Second, the workers' deaths are raised by critics of the Government with no interest in truth. They use those tragic accidents for cynical political gain.

The truth is that the insulation industry rate of house fires, accidents and deaths DROPPED during the Rudd stimulus period to ONE QUARTER of the rate during the Howard years.

Refer:

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2010/02/24/did-the-insulation-program-actually-reduce-fire-risk/

Total deaths by electrocution during the first Rudd period was about HALF the rate that prevailed during the Howard years.

Re: “The coroner laid that at Rudds door.”

No. The opposite is true, Keith.

The Coroner noted the obvious fact that accidents would not have occurred if the rapid-rate scheme had not been implemented.

But culpability for the deaths, he made abundantly clear, was shared three ways.

1. The state authorities:

“Under our constitutional arrangements, workplace health and safety is primarily within the domain of State Governments.”

2. The companies:

“That the employers of the three people whose deaths were investigated by this inquest failed to adequately discharge their responsibilities is evidenced by their conviction of offences under electrical and work-place safety legislation.”

3. In one case, the victim:

“Despite being directed not to use metal staples Mitchell chose to do so and died as a direct result.”

Please read the Coroner’s report, Keith, not Australia's lying media.

@Shadow Minister, re: “It could be easily argued … that the 2007 ranking of Australia 12th behind the USA, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Japan, Norway, Singapore, Finland, Iceland, Taiwan and Luxembourg was a serious miscalculation using the wrong measures ...”

Not at all, SM. Appropriate criteria were used: growth, employment, productivity, balance of trade, interest rates and taxation rates.

The period 1998 to 2007 was boom times for the Western world. No-one regards that as a period of sound economic management in Australia – except the Coalition and the mendacious media. Australia started 6th-ranked in the mid 1990s but slipped back to 12th by 2007.

Cheers,

AA
Posted by Alan Austin, Tuesday, 20 August 2013 7:11:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Out of the estimated $1.5 quadrillion dollars’ worth of derivatives on the planet right now, roughly $500 trillion is specifically related to interest rates.
http://etfdailynews.com/2013/08/19/this-could-trigger-a-major-sell-off-for-the-stock-market/
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-19/indian-rupee-collapses-worst-day-20-years

http://www.blacklistednews.com/NAFTA_on_Steroids%3A_The_TransPacific_Partnership_and_Global_Neoliberalism/28227/0/0/0/Y/M.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d0N8UdrbDE
Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 20 August 2013 7:23:58 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< There was no pink batts debacle, Ludwig. 100% media fabrication >>

Alright Alan, let’s presume that you are right. I am pleased to have read your assessment of this, which certainly puts it in a very different light to what I’ve heard in the media, or in any prior analysis.

But you surely can’t get Rudd off the hook for his amazing stuff-up with the corruption of border-protection and reinitiation of onshore asylum seeking, or for his or Gillard’s ineptitude in failing to clamp down on it once it had become obvious that the number of arrivals had greatly increased and was set to accelerate.

<< Australia is doomed, Ludwig, as long as the media maintains the destructive control it now exerts. >>

I do indeed share your concerns, at least to a fair extent, about the media.

But we do have an abundance of political analysis going on constantly, not least on the ABC and SBS…. which begs the question; why have I not heard the pink batts story in anything like the way that you have expressed it in your IA article? Surely not ALL of our media is highly biased!

You support the overall aim of the government to reduce emissions, which they attempted to tackle in one way via the home insulation pink batts scheme. But you seem to have no feeling at all about our ridiculously high immigration rate.

Well, surely the two are at complete odds! Pink batts, the carbon tax, solar panel rebates, etc, etc are all good aspects of a long-term strategy to reduce our national emissions. But we have an ever-rapidly increasing number of emitters!

These programs might reduce the average per-capita rate of CO2 emissions somewhat, but the number of ‘capitas’ is hooting ahead at a much greater rate!

So this is another huge reason for us to pull right back on our immigration intake.

continued
Posted by Ludwig, Wednesday, 21 August 2013 1:27:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. Page 14
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy