The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Rudd on the road to disaster > Comments

Rudd on the road to disaster : Comments

By Henry Ergas, published 3/4/2009

Kevin Rudd's errors are not merely the odd concession to economic folly, they go to the core of our economic prospects.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All
Sam said,

You are just repeating neo-liberal trash talk. Government is not a burden on society. It does not "suck away" at the common wealth. Quite the reverse, it is the ultimate source of it. New net wealth cannot be created until the sovereign spends. The private sector cannot create new net wealth, only re-distribute it. Those repeating the commonly heard version of this (goverment cannot create wealth, only re-distribute it) have it exactly backwards!

The annual government cost you speak of represents (at the federal level) the flow of money into the economy. It does NOT represent money taken out.

Public and private sectors are not opposites Sam, they are two sides of the same coin, the federal budget functioning as a mirror-reverse of our household budgets. This is the nature of our modern monetary economy.
Posted by Fozz, Saturday, 4 April 2009 7:41:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The words to explain the Rudd – dunnystan syndrome; well it is Embarrassing, and is a statement of the downfall of democracy; -and the antipathy of Socialism – then the total collapse of our ancestral effort - The band of incompetent Morons become the new religious messiahs and saviours , Nephilim Rudd at the helm is; Ignoble and Ignominious.
Perhaps it is time to call it stumps and let the censer consume it self – Survival of Knowledge and human consciousness is important, and not to submit to falsehoods and perpetual lies of promises of stolen treasures of nonexistent commodities.
The know where man , and no-thing automaton moron. Third world Reich President Rudd-dunnistan and cohorts.
Tell them to get stuffed.
Dont let them stuff us. may well be too late.
Posted by All-, Saturday, 4 April 2009 8:46:17 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
All,

do you actually have anything of any value to add to the discussion?
Posted by Fozz, Sunday, 5 April 2009 6:37:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
fozz wrote..'

'You are just repeating neo-liberal trash talk. Government is not a burden on society. It does not "suck away" at the common wealth. Quite the reverse, it is the ultimate source of it. New net wealth cannot be created until the sovereign spends.'...

sure, lets examine this...

govt not burden: so we are in a locked room with 8others...each have varying amount of money earned...and one vending machine in room...yep, simple economic cashflow situation...now I call myself government, and make the rest pay 50% of money in pocket to me...sure 'total' room economy still same...but individually less in each pocket...so you unlikely to use vending machine as ofter...hope you get what Im tring to say...

govt ultimate source: Ive got 50% of everybodies money in my pocket...say I use to employ two to keep room clean, and they spend on vending machine too...yep, on the face of it its 'economic growth'...but individually money in shortage...yeah?...so question is are we better off with 'smaller' government and let basic economics rule the economy(keep more money to spend in our own pockets) while parliament(law)/judiciary(enforcement) insure to fair play and prevent im-balancing sequestration of wealth in one sector...usually means excessive profit margin for goods and services(usually result of great demand for limited supply or unfair use of power...)

and on...point is we need better balance of cash sequestration areas...so is more money in government pocket from income-tax or leave more of money in your pocket better... which will 'stimulate'(the new catch phrase) the economy more?...

sam
Ps~situation very different in developing countries where they need to develop industry infrastructure...(more money in govt pocket needed...but the population need to keep a close eye on govt-expenditure...and when taxes need to be reduced so 'spending' can drive those industries...
Posted by Sam said, Sunday, 5 April 2009 7:43:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fozz, if the junk you supply, and call it an informed opinion, then if that is archetypical of your discussion, then No, I cannot compete with such an Ignorant idealist.
I would have spared you the embarrassment of naming it junk without a premise, Clueless garbage, other than gold pots at the bottom of your garden left by the pixies.
Undoubtedly someone else’s wealth looted.

Save your energy sam.
Posted by All-, Sunday, 5 April 2009 8:44:29 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Spindoc, thanks for a considered response, unlike much of the guff that has followed, don't you think? Unfortunately, unless some middle ground is reached, we will always have the same problems.

<< Every claim by a “reputable scientific source” can be refuted by an equal and opposite “reputable scientific source”.>>

I'm sorry Spindoc, this is simply not true. One only has to do a search of the scientific journals for the published literature. However, I would agree a lot of "noise" is being made in the popular press, media and blogosphere that claim AGW is bunkum.

G20? I can't help but think they are repeating the same problems that got us here in the 1st place. I certainly don't have any answers to this dilemma, but I hope most of the money is spent on tangibles, albeit the returns on them might not be felt until much later.
Posted by Q&A, Sunday, 5 April 2009 9:10:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy