foyle,

I also believe in an industry policy.

I am not saying budget deficits are not necessary; I am saying that Labor's habits are void of consideration for the reality that there will be more constraints in future decades than in past decades, at least if recent policy trends remain.

Yes, we need to make room for industry and infrastructure assistance, a reality that does not exclude deficits at time, but please forgive me for declaring that Labor has no real idea about how to go about it beyond rhetoric and ranting.

Not sure if Libs have much idea either, but this mob has had its turn and largely failed

with deficits at the last 6 budgets (after constant promises for surpluses) and a huge national debt it seems amazing that labour supporters are frothing at the mouth regarding costings. When the deficit can go from 18 billion to 30 billion in a matter of weeks supposedly based on treasury figures one can see that labour uses government figures simply to spin more lies. why would the liberals be so stupid to put out costings now. all they need to do is point out the wastage, incompetence and vandalism which is documented fact. labours budget honesty is equivalent to the IPCC honesty on climate. An absolute joke. Its like Lance Armstrong calling for honesty in AFL.

Foyle, to go further, I am no economist. I merely offer my limited opinion on matters that are very complex, probably still beyond my intellect.

I get some things wrong. Bought gold near its highest value and sold at a 25% loss.

But, why is it I could see that Treasury projections were going to badly wrong. Why is it I got my money out of shares before GFC and saved a lot of my money, at least by my more humble levels of wealth.

Answer, I don't really care what conventional or neo-conventional economic theory suggests. I make my mind up on the evidence confronting me, often with little regard to the institutions that supposedly offer most wisdom. In other words, every era has new demands in terms of policy possibilities and limitations.

My judgment on budgetary matters, at least at moment, is that Labor has little credibility beyond spending its way out of trouble. This view may change in the future if I was to read and learn from much better Labor party wisdom.

I am always open to reasoned analysis, but bias that does not recognise reality or even one's own shortcomings should never be tolerated. Again, Labor should have some foresight with its spending and never assume recoveries based on wishful thinking.

We hear this incessant mantra about the surpluses Costello produced in the years before the Global Financial Heist. Here's a fact check that would be useful: How much surplus was delivered by Costello overall? How much, overall, was receipts from flogging off the assets that Australians had funded and created over many decades, sometimes upwards of a century?

Keating also transferred a large amount of taxpayer-funded wealth into private, largely foreign, coffers (it wasn't for nothing that the global beneficiaries called Keating the world's greatest Treasurer), but the story we are being sold and Labor hasn't the wit to challenge is that Abbott's crew produced zillions of dollars in surpluses. How much of that money wasn't a surplus at all but merely a cashing in of the nation’s assets? What assets have the Rudd/Gillard governments flogged off?

Emp Jules
The sale of the assets by Costello helped pay off the last Labor debt. Keatings 100 billion debt. Seems you have a terribly short span of attention.

"The sale of the assets by Costello helped pay off the last Labor debt. Keatings 100 billion debt. Seems you have a terribly short span of attention." (I'm a Julia Nutter}

Actual figures and dates for actual privatisations? Ballpark would do, but not faked.