Aidan,

You say Labor's NBN was money well spent.

Except where it was way over budget and way behind schedule, with no resolution in sight for the manifest management problems, right?

You say the NDIS "will enable more disabled people to work." Some, perhaps, but not most. The world is not going to change to eternal sunshine and roses for the disabled. That part was propaganda.

It's a huge leap to assume, as you do without evidence, that the Gonski expenditures will pay for themselves by enabling more Australians to do "high value work", whatever that is.

It's now forty two years since the Karmel recommendations were accepted and substantial increases in spending on schools were legislated by the Whitlam government. And it's been downhill ever since, despite billions more poured into the system over the years.

Money of itself is not the answer to problems in education and the idea extra dollars will mean thousands more students will become magically capable of the "high value work" you fantasise about is plain nonsense. The same hard-working, talented minority will reap the rewards, as always, and the rest can please themselves.

To quote educationist Kevin Donnelly, the OECD's PISA testing “has consistently found that the amount of resources spent on education – including financial, human and material resources – is only weakly related to student performance”. The McKinsey report How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top draws a similar conclusion when it argues “despite substantial increases in spending and many well-intentioned reform efforts, performance in a large number of school systems has barely improved in decades”.

Anyway, Aidan, it's always amusing to see your economic theories presented as rock-solid facts. Keep up the good work.

Aidan, if we know there are tax loopholes? WTF? If we know? We should close them? Are you for real?
Well given a forty thousand page tax act and a loophole on every page? Quote unquote. (Kim beasley) When Howard rammed through his GST?

That's not going to be easy. Particularly if the only answer by complex rationalists is even more complexity? And to quote a visiting republican Senator appearing on Q+A, at some point complexity always becomes fraud.

And I challenge you to say there just isn't any of that connected to creative accounting by the "clever people".

The best way to close tax loopholes is to simply eliminate them by the simplicity of jettisoning the very convoluted complex instrument that makes such practise possible, and then replace it with something so simple and transparent, that not even the very cleverest number cruncher can get around, save becoming part of the soon to be eliminated black economy.

When your tax act has more holes than Swiss cheese its final day has come!

For mine, I believe the average honest taxpayer has had an absolute bellyful of being put upon by greedy and often obscenely rich tax avoiders. Some of whom, are just that insensitive as to believe their privileged tax avoiding position "entitles" them to automatic entrance to the taxpayer funded health or education system etc!

And from where I sit, no better than some fat cat private enterprise entity, raiding our charity bins to pick the eyes out of them!

One of my other pet hates is counterproductive profit demanding paper shuffling middlemen. And wherever possible, I'd chose/select their money grubbing practises ought to be outlawed.

And that pragmatic simplicity could lower our cost of living by half?

And a better outcome than simply adding pressure to the almost endless cost/wage spiral.

When something is so rotten as our multilayered and complex tax system. There is no way to rescue it, save jettisoning the whole rotten mess and beginning again, albeit without the unproductive profit demanding parasites.

In response to those 'Dissing' the public sector and collective consumption for tax generally:

AGAIN: the figures on Health in the US and Scandinavian countries say it all when we come to the *supposedly* innately 'inferior' nature of the public sector. The public sector shouldn't go *everywhere* - but there are natural public monopolies and areas where strategic intervention can support competitive markets. There are also areas where *collective consumption* via tax just gives people a better deal. Again - take Health in the US and the Nordics. 18% of GDP for 40% (private) coverage in the US - and 9% of GDP for universal coverage in the Nordics. Sure they have lower taxes in the US - but they end up spending MORE privately to get worse outcomes in Health than the Nordics do publicly for BETTER outcomes. That is - they spend TWICE as much. Case proven.

Captain Col wants to reject 'authoritarianism' but presumably supports Work for the Dole - and seems to think existing welfare is 'throwing money down the dunny'.

Meanwhile we have one of the meanest unemployment insurance regimes in the world. If you are unfortunate enough to lose your job then you are often forced to deplete your savings to the point where you have to wonder why you bothered saving in the first place... After a few months of trying to find work (which often does not exist) you have Work for the Dole which does stuff all for your employability. And in the meantime you don't have enough money to pay for internet, decent clothes and transport. So how the heck are you meant to find a job?

It's no accident that certain European and Nordic countries - some of which are amongst the most egalitarian - who have active labour market programs and industry policies - and who have comprehensive social insurance including unemployment insurance - are also amongst some of the most prosperous countries in the world....

The problem we have is a) we have a very highly targeted welfare system - whereas a universal social insurance model would mobilise a broader base of support... BUT this is sabotaged by our 'low tax culture and expectations' - and b) We have resentment against the unemployed beaten up over decades by right-wing monopoly media playing 'divide and rule'...

The Liberal 'ideal' again seems to be the United States. Faced with the Nordic example: high wage, egalitarian, prosperous, socially cohesive - They choose the US path instead - starkly divided, wracked by poverty and crime ; a class of working poor and class of utterly destitute ; lack of social cohesion...

The problem is that some Conservatives in this country are more concerned with 'punishing' the poor and the vulnerable than they are with CREATING AND SHARING PROSPERITY. They would rather a country where 'the proles knew their place' than a more egalitarian country where prosperity (and power) was shared.....

Shadow Minister - Revenue from winding back Negative Gearing will be small at first but of course will increase greatly with enough time.

In the meantime we have other options like cut superannuation concessions for the wealthy, gradually rescind dividend imputation, reform the income tax mix, hold Company Tax steady, impose progressive property taxes and maybe inheritance taxes, increase and restructure the Medicare Levy, maybe even tax the banks. And even all that would be kind of modest in the context of a $1.6 trillion economy.

Top priorities for me are a) Get NBN, NDIS and Gonski entrenched. b) Introduce National Aged Care Social Insurance - with significantly increased standards ; and provide improved 'care at home' for all those who would quality as well. And c) I'd also invest significantly in public housing and transport infrastructure. As that will improve housing affordability, as well as liveability in some of the new, 'infrastructure poor' suburbs. d) Finally I'd devote resources to cutting Hospital waiting lists, and increase welfare by a modest but significant amount (indexed).

I'd also INDEX the bottom two tax brackets.

Welfare is a common 'bogeyman': But we already have activity tests - so why 'stick the boot in' further? And why 'stick the boot' into the Aged and the Disabled?... Except that the big end of town needs scapegoats to target with austerity - to pay for the 'corporate welfare' - eg: tax evasion that NO-ONE does anything serious about....

I'd also want to look at re-establishing 'public sector players' in private health insurance, general insurance and banking. As a public sector player with a charter to enhance competition could actually contain their competitors profits by virtue of providing a better deal for consumers. That is: could force their competitors to provide a better deal to consumers through competition... Which always was one of the arguments for Government Business Enterprises in the first place...

Wow, so Tristan Ewins is a lefty. Who knew? But lovely to hear from you again, Tristan.

My point was much more than "'punishing' the poor" if it ever was about that. My point was that the poor can be got into employment by lowering the barriers to employing them for what they are worth. The minimum wage, so beloved of the lefties, is such a barrier. It penalises the lower skilled by removing them from the workforce because profit making companies cannot employ them at a profit. Their labour is simply not worth the minimum wage (plus super, plus on-costs, plus sick leave, plus long service leave, plus annual leave, plus training, plus this, that and the other).

Until lefties like Tristan understand that their so-called compassionate policies are actually most hurting the people they supposedly care about, they will never improve the lot of the poor.

There will also come the time when lefties have run out of other people's money.

But lefties can never, ever, ever admit they were wrong.