One can only stand back and marvel at someone who can say, apparently sincerely this:

"Huge increases in valuable dividend-producing assets. Best-managed economy in the world. By a mile. Some say the best the world has ever seen."

Gobsmacking; what dividend producing assets?

Speaking of assets Foyle says:

"The $21b was created by key strokes, to increase demand for goods and services in an economy that was flagging, and it ended up as increased savings in the private sector."

That is simply not correct; read the analysis in the links provided as to where the $21 billion went; into consumerables and private debt reduction; the consumerables, in an immense irony, were supplied by imports mainly from China and the reduction of the equivalent of credit card debt allowed those reducing that debt to increase their personal debt further.

Another link to the professor Yongding analysis of China's response to the GFC provides a stark comparison of where Australia went wrong:

http://twnside.org.sg/title2/ge/ge25.pdf

China's investment was not a bread and circus donation to citizens which was so small it encouraged only non-productive consumption but a tightly regulated investment in Fixed Assets which not only provided ongoing economic stimulus but also foreign investment.

That is, in Australia there was no second round residual into the economy. The reason for that as I explain is that the products purchased were imported products. There was no direct benefit to the economy at all; in fact it had a -ve effect because it increased the interest debt.

Anyway one can only hope 7th September will resolve this mess once and for all.

Foyle totally ignores the counterfeiting derivate market which is destroying our economies. World GDP $70 trillion. World phoney derivative market $ 700 trillion. This is enough money to make every person on this planet a millionaire.

Good morning all,

Thanks for these observations.

@Chris Lewis, Spindoc, Hasbeen and Runner:

The article sought to demonstrate (a) Australia with debt below12% net and 21% gross [of GDP] does not have a debt problem, (b) powerful forces in Australia lie about this continually and (c) many people believe them.

Can you see how your responses – insisting there is a debt problem without any counter-argument to the data provided – seem to affirm points (b) and (c)?

@Sonofgloin, re: “burgeoning record breaking $300 BILLION debt …”

Do you accept that most countries now have higher liabilities than before, just as most have larger populations, larger workforces, higher output, greater wealth and more assets?

Your challenge is to show how Japan, for example, with burgeoniong record-breaking134.3% net debt has a debt problem, then the USA at 87.9%, then New Zealand at 26.4%, then Australia at 11.6%.

Yes, most nations now have higher debt. That’s what GFCs do. To the question “which nation in the world has handled the challenges of the GFC best?” how would you answer, Sonofgloin?

Re: “Young lives and hundreds of millions stolen by the Batts scheme.” This is exactly what the media want you to believe, Sonofgloin. It is simply not valid.

Did you read this?

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2011/04/24/the-csiro-gets-hip-to-debunking-media-hysteria/

@Chris Lewis, re: “However, I suspect that the HIP will be always noted as a major policy debacle, as suggested by other academic pieces since”

Is there any academic rebuttal to the CSIRO’s finding that the rate of fires, injuries and deaths during the HIP fell to one quarter of the rate prevailing during the Coalition period?

@AdrianM, yes we have several philosophical differences, it seems.

Taxation = punishment. Really?

If you are on $70k, Adrian, your tax impost has fallen significantly relative to those on higher incomes. Have you calculated what you are now saving?

Do you want to go back to 2007 tax rates?

@Arjay, re: “Debt should only be attached to money that already exists.”

Why only money, Arjay? Why not Debt should only be attached to assets that already exist?

Cheers,

Alan A

Hi Alan,
Taxation = punishment. Really? No it = Theft

If you are on $70k, Adrian, your tax impost has fallen significantly relative to those on higher incomes. Have you calculated what you are now saving?

Do you want to go back to 2007 tax rates?
You missed the point, I could easily earn $100K+ but intentionally choose to earn $70K so as to give the government as little as possible.
If we change the tax brackets as you suggest, then I would just adjust my earnings to suit. As being debt free I only have to pay for what I consume.

Debt should only be attached to assets that already exist?
Alan Austin,
Of course it should but in most cases it gets quickly separated from the responsibility of those who cause massive debt & then it is us, the taxpayers again to pay for it.
I say debt should be attached to those who borrow by pretending to do it on our behalf.

Arjay,
"Foyle totally ignores the counterfeiting derivate market which is destroying our economies. World GDP $70 trillion. World phoney derivative market $ 700 trillion. This is enough money to make every person on this planet a millionaire".

I started campaigning about the cost to economies of fancy derivatives when the Bulletin was still being printed. I found this comment, dated June 1998, in a letter to a now prominent former work compatriot,

"My concern these days is that nearly everywhere genuine productive activities are being undermined by the rise in power terms of basically parasitic financial institutions and the dead load that these institutions and other unnecessary service industries impose. It is a sorry reflection on all of us that banks fill so many places in the top ten companies list in Australia."

Cohenite
You completely ignore the spending flows that I mentioned. Those flows follow in sequence from the initial spend of the $21b. When the first round of spending is complete each dollar is part of either someone else's income to be re-spent or savings. Did you give any thought to how and where the leakage from those flows into profits and savings go? Part of the savings go towards paying taxes which the Reserve re-credits to the government and the private banks deduct from their customers accounts.

The banks will probably then use the residuals to purchase government bonds. The interest on those bonds is unnecessary upper class welfare. Read the theory I recommended.

The China situation was nothing like Australia's. China had plenty of scope to build things we already have, such as car factories. Australia also needed affordable housing. The currency issuing government always need some shovel ready projects and it would probably be an improvement if that could be organised directly through local government.

If we don't have a industry policy soon we will have no industry. It the car industry fails the steel industry will follow.