Statements like this: "The mainstream media, in contrast, ignored the evidence and advanced the message their wealthy backers wanted voters to believe." Mark the write as so hard left as to be beyond reason. It is difficult to think of any mainstream political writer who hasn't repeatedly pointed to Mr Abbott's undoubted flaws... But, as I noted, the writer is uninterested in analysis..

The issue is not Abbott who has just survived the spill motion.

The problem is the LNP which is the most incompetent government in my memory. I have voted in 15+ elections and have often voted LNP but also ALP and even Green.

This government has no policy other than motherhood statements and slogans. Even their pre election policy document was a farce with no actual policy details...simply a wish list.

The LNP have had 18 months to deliver good policy and failed and the PM has the gall to stand before the public and say "he has learnt from his mistakes". There is no recovery for the LNP as they continue to demonstrate a schism between the extreme right wing ideology they practice and what the voting public actually expect.

Oh for a leader with vision; bring back a Hawke, a Keating or even Malcolm Fraser would be acceptable.

Abbott will ditch all of the electorally difficult policies now with the only objective being re-election and to hell with the country.

bah humbug!

no mention of stopping drownings and illegals Alan as well as scrapping the most dishonest tax that previous PM lied about. Just shows the hatred you have blurs your vision. Were you one of the regressives who a few years ago said Tony was unelectable?

20x20 hindsight is a wonderful thing Alan and nowhere in your critique have you laid out what could have been done different?

Even so, the Leopard has offered to change his spots!

Hardly the problem given the policy choices have been and remain the problem?

So, what could be done differently?

Well, lets reverse the pain and remove all the remaining middle class welfare; thereby freeing up 85 billion + P.A.?

To retire debt, balance the budget/bring down a surplus!

Around Australia there are literally dozens of shovel ready projects, that once built, will produce income; i.e., the range crossing/rapid rail links. Many paid for by the sale of resumed and rezoned land.

Other similar projects, could be funded initially, via self terminating thirty year bonds.

And pay off the bond commitments, via earned income!

Vastly cheaper power, would pay for itself a dozen times over, during the productive life of the thorium power plants we could build; thereby attracting energy dependent high tech manufacture to these shores.

REAL tax reform, that eliminates avoidance, the parasites and unproductive practice, to create the world's cheapest tax system; DOABLE, to also end the current industrial exodus from these shores.

The trouble for Tony and other politicians, is the elitist approach, the endemic recalcitrant tin ears; plus an inherent inability to think outside the box!?

Plus a refusal to end an unnecessary reliance on foreigners, and the control that comes with it, not to mention asset stripping/virtual destruction of Australian icons.

For heavens sake, we have a super fund, that at 1.8 trillion, is bigger than our economy!

We can't keep buying far more than we sell to the rest of the world.

What's missing is a helmsman with enough vision to steer a path towards prosperity, and true economic sovereignty!
Rhrosty.

Is this bloke still around? Hell, I thought he would have drowned in the growing pool of his own stinking bile by now.

Does anyone except Shorten actually read his tripe. I would think even lefties would find it hard to stomach.

Do you publish him just to show how disgusting the far left is Graham, or to frighten the children?

It's all very well to finger-point - however
how about some suggestions as to what should
be done next to improve things. And if we are
really in such dire straights - as far as
our country's leadership is concerned and the
current government - who would be a better
alternative? And why?

Any ideas?

When Gillard staved off a challenge winning 72 to 31 Abbott shrilled that she was "illegitimate" and should stand aside as she had lost the support of her party.

But when Abbott wins 61 to 39 it is a firm confirmation of his leadership and full steam ahead for good governance.

The man could not lie straight in bed...yet another in the litany of lies, exaggerations and preposterous statements. one of the commenters here had the hide to bring up the old chestnut of supposed Gillard carbon tax lie...jeez obviously can't read or understand Abbott's own actions and statements.

Dear Peter,

I fully agree - with the man's hypocrisy.
It appears that he is determined to totally
destroy the Liberal Party. The Party could
recover under a different leadership, but certainly
not under this man's leadership.

Gosh Hasbeen, are you really that distraught at the realisation of what Mr Abbott's government has wrought, and how silly the mainstream media is now looking in hindsight?

And as to what Mr Abbott's government might have done that would have served our country much better, Rhosty's list seems like a good start.

Runner, are you OK?

Sorry — "Rhrosty".

Interesting comments. Thanks.

@Curmudgeon, no, the opposite is true.

@Rhrosty, agree mostly.
Just on this, however: “nowhere in your critique have you laid out what could have been done different?”
Correct. This piece is about reportage, not the performance and personalities which are the subject of the reportage.
Happy to discuss that, however.
In a nutshell, this Government should not have spent so wastefully, and should have expanded rather than cut the required streams of tax revenue.
Agree with the rest of your post, Rhrosty. Sound, as always.

@Hasbeen, good morning to you too.
No, this piece is not about Mr Shorten. It is about how the Fairfax, Murdoch and ABC newsrooms got things so badly wrong about Mr Abbott.
Fortunately, they now admit this. So things may well improve.

Agree with most of the other observations here so far. Thank you.
Happy to discuss, as always.
Cheers, AA

Dear Alan,

The current government keeps stressing their
so called "achievements" thus far. I find
their claims don't make any sense.

Their claim of "we got rid of the carbon tax,"
How is that a success. All that's done is
given the big polluters a free ride to continue
with their pollution of the environment and
its stopped our investments into renewable energy
sources - which would be good for the economy and
jobs.

Then their claim of we stopped the "Mining Tax."
Big whoop. So what. All that's done is - stopped
tax income to the treasury - and the mining industry
already gets more than its fair share of concessions
and subsidies - at a time when we need the funds -
why not make those who can afford to pay - pay.
Instead of increasing the GST and making the poor pay.

Then the old favourite of stopping the boats.
How have they stopped the boats. They merely diverted
them to offshore-islands in the Pacific and pay the
governments of those islands millions of dollars to take
care of the problem. Very wise economics (not).

Am I the only one seeing what is obvious?

Well, that's enough for now. I'm sure there will be more
concerns coming up in the future.

Agree with that, Foxy,

You won't be surprised - if you have read the article giving rise to this discussion - if it is suggested that this may be due to the influence of a certain media magnate who lives in America and directly controls much of Australia's media.

Such is Australia's doom.

Fox, "Am I the only one seeing what is obvious?"

You need to move on.

It should be so obvious to all that the CGT should be as a first priority, broadened and as a second priority increased as to be a self-evident truth. Yet both sides of the parliament are trying to be populist and are ignoring the shortfall of tax receipts that is increasing the deficit.

Meg Lee, whom you probably supported at the time, sure stuffed it on the GST and so did Labor.

The problem with that, Onthebeach, is that the GST is regressive. Any change to the GST will impact poor people more than the middle income earners, and middle income people more than the rich.
So complex offsets are then required.
Far simpler to just do what the last Parliament resolved to do, had that government been re-elected:
(a) reap just a tiny amount of the super profits given to foreign companies via the vast mineral wealth being shipped abroad so cheaply;
(b) rejoin the rest of the world with some sort of tax on carbon pollution;
(c) recoup some, if not all, of the $50 billion lost to the economy on superannuation concessions;
(d) clamp down on the burgeoning tax avoidance industry;
(e) deal effectively with tax evasion; and
(f) cut back the wasteful government spending that has occurred since September 2013.
Budget deficits will soon be restored, the debt will be repaid, and everyone will be able to enjoy tax cuts.
It's just a matter of arithmetic really.
Oh yes, and getting the rich to pay a fair share.
How hard could that be ..?

Alan Austin,

All taxes are unfair. The GST is the fairest tax for all, taken as a package.

Yes there are other matters such as superannuation that need to be looked at in the tax review.

However the GST does need to be broadened and increased as a matter of urgency. Time is of the essence as well.

Alan Austin,
Be very careful with matters of arithmetic — people often use them to justify bad policies, usually after treating constants as variables or short term increases as trends.

____________________________________________________________________________

onthebeach,
The GST is one of the unfairest taxes of all. It's easily dodged (by buying from overseas), it hits the poor hardest, it increases the cost of living and it is costly for businesses to comply with.

It shouldn't be broadened or increased, it should be abolished.

Isn't it amazing how we now hear conservatives talking about the advantages to the rich of superannuation and the need to raise revenue through it?

When Labor even meekly suggested a small reeling back in Costelloe's largesse the LNP went completely ape$hit.

As an aside, Tony, Tony, Tony, what did you say to your South Australian federal members to buy their spill votes? Don't they get it? They've been sold a Tony, just like the electorate at the last election. Poor dears.

......oh yeah, and conservative shock-jock Alan Jones is talking about forced investment of my super into infrastructure projects. Imagine the howl from him and the conservative press if that was a Labor thought-bubble.

To get and keep his cold dead hand on power, Tony has consistently shown he will say and do anything. Take his promise on the GST as a guide to the future. He starves the states so they do his dirty work for him.

Dear Alan,

Thank You for replying.

We should all be concerned with allowing our
mainstream media to be in the hands of one
powerful man - whose influence is undeniable.

Thank goodness that we still have our Independent Media.
Which we should all support.
Afterall as - Julian Burnside QC wrote in an article -
"Better Media Is Good For Democracy."

Broadening out the GST - if it hits essentials required
by the vulnerable - would be disastrous and unfair.

How about we take a look at the salaries, perks, and benefits,
enjoyed by the current, and former politicians. For example,
at the last quote -
former PMs get a $200,000 salary for the rest of their lives,
(possibly more nowadays), plus enormous travel allowances,
office accommodation, staffing costs, et cetera. Then there are
a host of other benefits - like the airline "Gold Pass,"
which entitles ex-PMs up to 40 business class flights a year
(that's about 1 a week). And that's only the tip of the ice-berg.

And the pollies are telling us the "Age of Entitlement" is
over?

How about setting an example before telling us what they're
going to cut from the rest of us.

Luciferase, "forced investment of my super into infrastructure"

I wasn't too impressed by that either.

Mind you there is already 'ethical investment' pressure on superannuation funds to hog tie managers and can easily erode earnings. OK where someone wants to opt for such a fund.

Choice (consumers guide) tried at one stage to head off on a different path and started producing articles on ethical investment and so on,
http://www.choice.com.au/reviews-and-tests/money/investing/products/ethical-investing.aspx

Past history
Didn't Menzies take the proceeds of the levy that was paid by workers to secure their age/retirement pensions, and pay it into consolidated revenue? Maybe someone has the facts on that.

Yes OTB, ethical investment is a choice, not mandatory as countenanced by Jones and whoever he is talking with over infrastructure. He's the guy who softens up the public for Tony's thrusts.

Again, re submarines, does it not occur to all liberal members that doing deals with a few (South Australians)so that one man maintains power ahead of other contenders reeks of corruption?

Tony has cast his survival as a matter of party solidarity when he has divided and conquered the party. Who knows what other deals got done! So much for putting the country, let alone the party, ahead of any one man. Where will he stop? How should other contenders behave in a liberal leadership contest with this kind of precedent?

As with most people, Abbott makes my skin crawl.

It was Murdoch who helped dethrone Howard and gave us the Rudder wrecker squandering Australias healthy financial situation in no time flat. Often an inconvenient fact for the regressives who now want to destroy Australia from opposition via tax funded journalist.

For a demonstration why the left wing are champion haters, hypocrites and whingers, you couldn't want a better demonstration than this article, and its supportive posts. Face it. Your political opinion is nothing but blind and ignorant hatred.

Intriguing discussion. Thank you.

@Onthebeach, no, taxes are good. They buy civilisation.
The GST in Australia is quite fair with its current offsets. Any tampering, however, would do more harm than good: extending it without offsets would be regressive; extending it with more offsets would render the system far too complicated and costly to administer.
Far better simply to get the wealthy to pay a fair cop by stopping the rorts and tweaking the income tax and corporate tax rates.

@Foxy, yes agree with that.
We may be witnessing a shift in the influence of Mr Murdoch's newspapers as we speak.
Recent election results in Victoria and Queensland suggest it may be in decline. Hard to prove, however.
Some of Mr Murdoch's corporate investor partners are now pressuring him to close all newspapers because most, if not all, make substantial losses.

@Runner: No, the opposite is true.
All the evidence confirms that Mr Murdoch has actively opposed all Labor governments and leaders since 1972.
Don’t be fooled by that sneaky ruse in 2007. It was not at all genuine.

@ Jardine K. Jardine, please calm down.
The opposite of what you say is true.
This piece simply matches the words of the mainstream press before the 2013 election with their words now. Nothing more.
There is no expression of “blind and ignorant hatred”, is there?

Cheers, AA

There you go folks - we've now been given a perfect example of -
forming an opinion without having to get the facts.
A great time-saver.

Ooooops - my previous comment was meant for
Jardine. I forgot to address it to him.

Dear Alan,

I think that Murdoch's support will drop even further
when Mr Abbott's popularity continues to dive. Murdoch
does not like "losers."
Take a look at Andrew Bolt, Alan Jones,Miranda Devine,
Janet Albrechtsen - and other previous
supporters.
No more.

'@Runner: No, the opposite is true.
All the evidence confirms that Mr Murdoch has actively opposed all Labor governments and leaders since 1972.
Don’t be fooled by that sneaky ruse in 2007. It was not at all genuine.
'

Thanks for clarifying that Alan. It was pretty hard believeing Murdoch would be so stupid as to support Rudd. Rudd seemed to suck in a huge number of the gullible. Just maybe Murdoch understands that a surplus is actually a good thing, something that in decades the Labourites/Greens have not.

Dear runner,

It's time that you and the government stop blaming
Labor. The government needs to govern. At the moment
Mr Abbott and his front-bench act as if they're still
in opposition.

It is not the responsibility of governments to make
a profit. National priorities are important and
social services are the responsibility of governments -
even if they profit nobody - such infrastructure
as public schools, universities, sewers,police forces,hospitals,
the army, navy, air-force, fire departments, libraries,
parks and the like.

Having a surplus at the expense of cuts and neglect to
infrastructure, health, education, and other socially
valuable services is not a good thing - as John Howard
learned.

We're stuck with a party that wants cuts (not for the rich
mind) and voters who are worried about services. If the
current government and Mr Abbott remain deaf and indifferent
to the concerns of the voters - they will undoubtedly follow
in the footsteps of Victoria and Queensland at the next
federal election.

The state election in NSW is just around the corner.
It will be interesting to see whether Mr Abbott stuffs up
prior to that election - as he did prior to the Victorian
election .

'Dear runner,

It's time that you and the government stop blaming
Labor.'

no Foxy I blame the totally ignorant voters who obviously have no idea. And when did you say Labour last produced a surplus? How many times did Swan promise it?

Hi Runner,

Can you tell me why we need a surplus and if we do need one right now why have the LNP increased the deficit?

I can tell you that the voters in my area of Queensland, who changed their vote back to Labor this last election after the awful government that Campbell and the LNP provided us with, are not impressed with being told they are stupid by you or Tony Abbott.

Mollydukes

Dear runner,

The following link explains quite clearly
that "economic comparisons are useless without
context."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-07/alberici-economic-comparisons/4672166

Some of the things mentioned are that -
"property and share prices rose
almost continuously throughout the Howard-Costello
years. This not only fed positive consumer and
investor sentiment but it generated multiple millions
in capital gains tax revenue. There were also global
influences at play. Between 1998-99 and 2008-09
the mining boom delivered an unprecedented 75 per cent
rise in Australia's terms of trade -(prices we receive for
our exports relative to what we pay for imports) ..."

There's much, much, more -
it's worth a read.

Mollydukes

'Can you tell me why we need a surplus and if we do need one right now why have the LNP increased the deficit? '

Just look at what deficits have done to Greece.

You also say

'I can tell you that the voters in my area of Queensland, who changed their vote back to Labor this last election after the awful government that Campbell and the LNP provided us with, are not impressed with being told they are stupid by you or Tony Abbott.'

simple truth is hard to swallow especially for voters purely interested in a little short term candy or for those gaining by sucking on the public purse

Dear runner,

The only ones "sucking on the public purse"
under the current government is the rich
and the pollies.

Runner, telling me that Australia is like Greece is not going to cut it as an answer. How are we like Greece? For one thing Greece is part of the EU and we are not.

And you did not answer me about why the current Abbott government has actually increased the deficit that the other government left them.

I don't think that the sort of deficit we have is a problem because there are many other countries who have much larger deficits than we do and they have had them for years and they haven't turned out like Greece.

I read about Greece and I think one thing that is very different there is that the ordinary people didn't pay their taxes and their government was so corrupt that they didn't make people pay. People thought why should I pay tax when other people are not paying their fair share.

Australians are very different; we are people who do like to pay our fair share and help out when people are down on their luck so I don't think we will end up like Greece.

Are you sure that you can tell the truth about what is a good government when so many other people are changing their minds now that these LNP governments have shown that they can't be trusted and won't explain things honestly so that we can all understand how it works.

And how come they still tell us that the money trickles down when all the graphs show that the money gets sucked up to the people at the top.

That's not fair is it?

What is it about this government that has made your life better?

Mollydukes

'Can you tell me why we need a surplus and if we do need one right now why have the LNP increased the deficit? '
That's a goood question because it's something most people misunderstand. runner's answer was totally wrong, but most of the population are under the same false imoression.

Unlike Greece, Australia has unlimited credit because we own the RBA (whereas Greece doesn't own the ECB). So we never have to worry about running out of money (state governments do have to be a bit careful in this regard, though not as cautious as some have been recently).

We don't need a surplus. But when the economy is going well, a surplus is desirable because if the government doesn't take money out of the economy by fiscal policy (a surplus), they will have to do so by monetary policy instead (higher interest rates) or put up with higher inflation (which is generally considered to be worse).

When the economy is going badly, as it now is, a surplus is entirely undesirable because it results in economic decline. Austerity is what decimated the Greek economy, not deficits. And when the economy declines, so does tax revenue. And because of this, a declining economy is very likely to result in a higher deficit.