In the next 3 yrs the tax revenue loss will total $ 115 billion.Add to this the cost of growing unemployment and we are going into serious debt.That $200 billion deficit mentioned earlier,is the projected total deficit for the next 3 yrs.It could be easily much more.At the end of the last recession in 1995 Labor left us with a Govt deficit then of $98 billion which would be more than double in todays money plus interest.

The size of Govt must shrink in proportion to the tax revenue loss.It is better that people find productive jobs than the contrived micky mouse ones in our bloated bureaucracies.There is no doubt that many people are working hard long hours,but how productive are many of these jobs? We have the farce of OH&S putting too much regulation on business.Govt contracts with annointed contractors costing the tax payer 3 times the real cost because of regulation,fear of litigation and just plain incompetence.

Either we make the hard decisions now or suffer a prolonged servere downturn.Going into debt for productive long term infrastructure projects is fine,but going into debt to prop up a failed,inefficient private and public sector is folly of the highest order.Kevin is currently bailing out failed state Govts and thus is rewarding stupidity and nepotism.

None of our Govts especially NSW have a clue about productivity or efficient use of resources and we seem destined to repeat past failures.

under one God,

these are all good questions and all perfectly logical to ask. One of the most confusing things is the fact that money is not a real, physical thing – it is an abstract concept, an idea. It exists, but not in a physical form and is thus not bound by any law of physics.

It is perfectly logical to assume that a federal budget functions exactly like our household budget, only larger – but it doesn’t. When it comes to currency, the federal government is unique. It is the currency monopolist. It and it alone can create currency (in Australian dollars). This medium of exchange is entirely imaginary (though very much legitimate) and the currency monopolist can create any sum it chooses for that very reason.

Imagine the fed was a bowling alley. Does a bowling alley need to keep say, 100 000 points in reserve, just in case a team of really great bowlers comes through and scores all the available points? Is it possible for the alley to run out of points? Does it ever occur that the alley announces “attention all bowlers! All available points have now been scored so we are forced to close down”? Of course not. As long as there are people to keep setting up the pins and keep bowling, there is NO LIMIT to the number of points that can be scored because the points are only an imaginary concept. So too with money. The currency monopolist is perfectly capable of creating any amount it sees fit. They do not have to borrow points from another bowling alley and do not have to collect all points scored before the bowlers go home so they can be “spent” (used at the next days gaming) – that would be ridiculous

My full post has exceeded the word limit. I will answer your questions about the role of taxation and others later.

90% of all human commerce & ECONOMIC activity is concerned with potential SEXual gratification.

That means the whole purpose of economic stimulus packages is to convince women to have more children IN EVERY COUNTRY not just in the target stimulus nation.

In turn this creates IMMIGRATION pressure into first world countries from poorer nations where the flow-on of stimulus packages create additional children and greater aspirations.

Further, the stimulus packages will only work once the world's population has increased 5% to account for the 5% loss in real growth that we have seen since the downturn began last October.

This result creates ONLY negative consequences for global sustainability:

1. It favours and empowers women as the consumer of choice to enrich major corporations and Big Governments. This will create rich/poor social divisions never seen before in human history. In essence it will subtly reinstate and continue the excesses of the recent past because the same sexual motivation will not have been addressed.

2. It disenfranchises men who will react with a natural violence that will shake the entire planet with strikes and war. It will also disenfranchise women who will ultimately (if not already) become the goods & chattels of steel-ceilinged corporations and Governments

3. It guarantees exponential increases in oceanic effluents & toxic gaseous emissions that will kill marine ecologies, thus raising ocean heat capacity,retention&phase-energy breakout points. This will lead to expanded climate change patterning such as more severe flooding, drought, tornadoes and hurricanes.

These changes WILL occur rapidly from now on. This is guaranteed by the REAL population growth AIM of stimulus packages occurring quickly as DESIGNED.

Economic growth without global population growth is NOT POSSIBLE.

Fozz, your statements about govt. being a currency monopolist, leaves out the banks' collective creation of many times more 'imaginary' money than the mint. It is this credit out of thin air, without any real products associated with it, which is the problem.

Fozz<<One of the most confusing..money is not a real,physical thing..it is an abstract concept,an idea...It exists,but not in a physical form and is thus not bound by any law of physics.>>fo bro mate you deluding or decieving[not sure which]it egsists in coin and note[as well in credit and REAL DEBT, owed in their franchised fiat

the fed constitution allows govt to issue COIN=legal tender[ie copper silver and gold coin]thats legal tender[via the fed it releases promises to pay coin or more IT..[USED TO RELEASE promise to pay in sterling silver]read a pound note[promise to pay bearor one pound sterling [silver]

but then the fed got privatised..[the real;silver went from our silvercoin-age[replaced with nickle]and the bankers stole the REAL silver and gold..[our real wealth got stole right there]

THE FED govt WAS unique,..but the right to issue currency got stole BY THE FED

<<It>>..IE THE FED..<<is NOW the currency monopolist...It and it alone can create currency(in Australian dollars).This medium of exchange is entirely imaginary though very much legitimate) and the currency monopolist can create any sum it chooses for that very reason.>>

<<The currency monopolist is perfectly capable of creating any amount it sees fit. They do not have to borrow points>>..EGSACTLY[with a few minour edits].clearly you know whats what [just seem to be confused ABOUT WHO OWNS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO PRINT our money

[see prior to the fed privatisation we DIDNT HAVE INCOME tax[that only came up when the fed went bankrupt[and the bankers..[money changers]..stole the peoples means of money creation for free into our FIAT/money created for your fee,

govt has to lend it so do thee,only the bankers give it to their mates for free[i will swap mine for yours...for them currency swaps cost nothing]..plus any debt is in their power to print,its repayment..any time THEY chose..[not govt]

Hi Grim.

The mass trend towards debt as an everyday tool for everything instead of saving first then spending later certainly is problematical and the banks certainly love it. Living on ever-increasing debt was never going to be sustainable.

However, banks cannot actually create money, only a currency monopolist (in Australia, the federal government) can do that. Banks can access a vast pool of money from the inter-bank market an on-lend it at a margin. ALL money loaned by banks was originally issued by a currency monopolist.

under one God,

I am struggling to decipher your post. Notes and coins are REPRESENTATIONS of money. Actual money is an abstract concept. Every time you swipe your plastic card, money was transferred without needing notes or coins. The government does not spend by sending out shipping container loads of notes to banks – it simply credits bank accounts. The money simply appears in the account as an increased numerical value.

I’m not sure what you mean by “The fed got privatised”

As promised: the role of taxation at the STATE government level is indeed to finance the government’s spending. They are not sovereign. But the role of taxation by the FEDERAL government is to create demand for the currency issued by the fed so that they can spend their otherwise worthless currency