Thanks, Arjay,
No, I don't have a spare 45 minutes to listen to Jim Rickards. But will be happy to read your summary here of how his analysis relates to this topic.
We may differ on the definition of debt, I suspect.
It may be a bit off topic, however. This piece accepts that government borrowings are necessary in all developed mixed economies.
The focus here really is on the hypocrisy of one political party declaring in opposition that debt was bad, and that it was "out of control" in Australia last year - and then in government intentionally increasing the debt substantially this year.
What does Mr Rickards think about that?
What do you think about that, Arjay?

Rather strange; my post was taken down and I was on topic with no abuse or foul language.

When new money is created as debt, eventually the debt can never be repaid. Jim Rickards has noted that in the 50's and 60's $1.00 of debt created growth of $2.40 in the USA and now that same $1.00 creates 3 cents of growth. So clearly when private banks create both inflationary money + money for growth as debt, the debt exponentially outstrips growth and can never be repaid.

We need Govt banks that create new money debt free for infrastructure and essential services like health and pensions.

As always, Alan, your analysis is as detailed as it is awesome.

Sadly, it doesn't amount to much, because it all ultimately depends on how the media plays it. And we all know how the media will keep on playing it:

ALP = wasteful financial management/Coalition = responsible financial management

Even if Australia's debt ever reached Greek levels, the media would still be banging the same old drum.

(And BTW, much of the Greek debt-collapse was caused by the fact that it had Europe's highest military budget. Contrary to prevailing neo-liberal propaganda, its social expenditure budget - pre-collapse - was Europe's second lowest.)

Yuyutsu,

"No wonder that the coalition could not stop it - only God can - otherwise we will end up like Greece."

Lol!...here's a graph (bit dated but still viable for comparison)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/linkableblob/3727694/data/possum-graph-8-government-debt-as-gdp-data.jpg

Govt debt as percentage of GDP.

Check out where Australia is and then check out where Greece is.

You'll note that at the end of Labor's fiscal reign, Australia has one of the lowest debt to GDP ratios in the OECD - and an AAA economy.

My first post has re-appeared. Alan it is really worthwhile listening to Jim Rickards author of 'The death of Money' The next big collapse will make 2007 and 2008 seem like a walk in the park.

If you want to know the detail and how to prepare see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYW5OGWfqJc and read his book. He is among many like Gerald Celente ,Max Keiser and Dr Paul Craig Roberts saying this will be far bigger than the Great Depression if we don't act.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/09/25/will-russia-china-hold-fire-war-alternative-paul-craig-roberts/

AA,

Good to see that your complete absence of economic credentials has not stopped you from posting fiscal fantasy, and that your hypocrisy settings are still on Max.

The single flaws in your polemic are:

1 The AAA rating was achieved under Howard after paying back most of Labor's previous debt.

2 The budget cycle runs from July to June, So the budget results up to July 2014 are entirely the result of Labor's policies,

3 Given the coalition's MYEFO done a few months after by treasury showed how badly Labor's predictions were prior to the election.

4 Labor is steadfastly blocking all of Hockey's saving measures, even those that it had included in its own election promises.

5 The only reason Labor were able to spend like drunken sailors without bringing the economy to its knees was because of the debt free status which labor inherited, which is very different from the mess that labor left behind.