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


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Will the real fiscal conservatives please stand up? > Comments

Will the real fiscal conservatives please stand up? : Comments

By Rowen Cross, published 15/5/2009

The Rudd Government must try harder if it wants to escape Labor's reputation for profligate spending and financial mismanagement.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Pretty good summary of situation.
Rudd is clearly not trying hard enough to minimise the deficit, but life is made hard by the hostile senate.
Monetary policy would be a disaster at the moment: We have a lack of credit in the markets and they want to lower interest rates. Why should the price of money behave the direct opposite of every other market? When something is scarce the price should go up, not down. Who will pay for this distortion? Certainly not the banks who seem to win every which way (private profits, public risk).
Keating had his faults (He should have been a Liberal), but he allowed the money market to work and this set things up for the boom years that Howard/Costello rode all the way to the next trough.
We definitely need to scale back middle class welfare and corporate welfare. "Conservatives" (the most radical group in last decade!) want small government, yet like in the US they do the exact opposite. The difference is in the recipients and scale. They used up the surplus in electoral bribes and completely ignored infrastructure and social welfare. (Check out the crime stats over the last 20 years.)
Health moneys should be spent on hospitals, R&D and doctors and nurses...*not* private insurance profits. Education should be spent on schools and teachers...*not* boat sheds and country lodges. (Not until all classrooms have air conditioners and sufficient computers anyway)
Conservatives may rightly bag the "Robin Hood" brigade but at least they do not do the reverse. Profiteering by taking formo the needy is a very low act.
Posted by Ozandy, Friday, 15 May 2009 9:50:53 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 few responses indicate many are aware it dosnt matter who is in govt[they all follow the orders of the elite,..who control banks industry law and politics

a majority of..“the people’s representatives”..voted as the discredited banksters instructed.

Hundreds of billions of public-dollars have gone to bail out the banksters,..but when some Democrats tried to get the Senate to do a mite for homeowners,the US/Senate stuck with the banks.

The Senate’s motto is:“Hundreds of billions for the banksters,not a dime for homeowners.”

If Obama was naive about well-intentioned change before the vote,he no longer has this political handicap...[neither krudd..[neither turn-bull into votes]

Democratic Majority/Whip;Dick Durbin acknowledged the voters’defeat by the discredited banksters...The banks,Durbin said,..“frankly own the place.”

It is not difficult to understand why...Among those who defeated the homeowners bill are senators who..According to reports,the banksters have poured a half million dollars into Tester’s campaign funds....Baucus has received $3.5 million;..Lincoln $1.3 million;..Nelson $1.4 million;..Landrieu $2 million;..Johnson $2.5 million;..Specter $4.5 million.

The same Congress that can’t find a dime for homeowners or health care appropriates hundreds of billions of dollars for the military/security complex.

The week after the Senate foreclosed on American homeowners,..the Obama“change”administration asked Congress for an additional $61 billion dollars for the neoconservatives’..war in Iraq and $65 billion more for the neoconservatives’..war in Afghanistan.

Congress greeted this request with a rousing..“Yes we can!”

The additional $126 billion comes on top of the $533.7 billion..“defense.. budget for this year...The $660 billion–probably a low-ball number–is ten times the military spending of China,..the second most powerful country in the world.

How is it possible that..“the world’s only superpower” threatened by the likes of Iraq and Afghanistan?..How can the US be a superpower if it is threatened by countries that have no military capability other than a guerilla capability to resist invaders?

These“wars”are a hoax designed to enrich the US armaments industry and to infuse the“security forces”with police powers over American citizenry...The answer is that the military/security lobby,..the financial gangsters,..and AIPAC rule...The American people be damned.
Posted by one under god, Saturday, 16 May 2009 12:50:00 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
I wish I wish I wish ; Fiscal Geniuses would "Do It" for the layman and "Example it", the Debt , in GST x Years X Percent , eg; 40% GST for 10 Years .
Expressed this way will benefit , not just people like me but Labor Govt. who never have and as it is now never will apparently .

This author given his apparent knowledge might also consider :

Why haven't the unconscionable vultures that destroyed our finance system been brought to heel before our Courts ?
Include the USA .

Do we need a separate house of review in the Reserve Bank made up of equal numbers of the top 2 Political Parties ?
Posted by ShazBaz001, Saturday, 16 May 2009 8:05:24 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
sustainable balance is a fundamental equation of nature/time/civilization...even your back yard...say grass develops 'unbalanced power' then shortly 'grass' will wipeout all trees/shrubs/dependent-flora for its own success/ overwhelming bacterial infection to host(local_ground here)dies...unbalanced force is doomed to self_destroy by its success...

why above here?...theres huge unbalancing force at birds-eye observation of evolution of events to current...says 'government' taken over by organized-women and their 'dogs'acting for their own interest primarily...if so imagine...public power at their disposal...all will bow down to it, corporations/media/courts/ get benefit of their 'share'...

this budget shows little in 'logical reasoned approach' to maintain sustainable balance of panders to powerful(organized-women-forc e)...attacks 'engine of the economy'(middle_class(creativity) by taxing\excluding from handouts...and leaves alone main economy-diseases like large-government, monopolistic uncompetitive companies, sequestration of monies out of economic flow-stream(less money out there, less to get/spend)...

[like 'nurse practitioners'...women-power dominated area whose latest pet-project is this(after easymoney-for-pregnancy) 'nurse'(with no common-standard education standard required for public information known) able to diagnose/prescribe/refer to specialist...nurses take over medical_care of cities...that leaves current evolved system of gp's redundant...their solution...get them out into bush by bribery($120,000)/force(bond as part of medicaltraining)...imagine power needed to achieve this deranged scheme...'nurses' billing at gp rates and refering all but simplest to specialist who bill 10x for same gps now deal with...another budget blowout...]

I think if we dont do something to bring back balance...'corrupted_government tendrils will infest all politicians/judges just stay at home and get paind than just playing hollywood for image of good_governing...and 'government' rule all...

this budget was supposed to be all take some of the suffering...and hand in there...till economy/country readapts...I see none of leaves alone the extremes to middle, of which the super-rich the main cause of sequestation of money(keep multi-billions in income generating cycles, but money out of not even 10 of their future-generations need for excess-lifesyle)...and poor...of which 'willing-parasitic-poor' group...that have no intention of ever contributing to economic creativity...a good budget would have acted to push above two extremes of scale towards middle...

think we need to sort our governments out first...before things get certainly much worse...

Posted by Sam said, Saturday, 16 May 2009 10:49:36 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
"I'm a fiscal conservative" must go down as the greatest lie ever told by a politician, in any country, ever. Guess what, we have another world record.

Thanks kRuddy, that's one we could do with out.

Just how long will it take for the average Ozy to wake up to this bloke?
Posted by Hasbeen, Saturday, 16 May 2009 2:08:22 PM
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
This is a pretty balanced article.

I liked parts of the Budget if we take the view that increased spending on infrastructure will grow and/or keep jobs that would otherwise be at risk. Better infrastructure should also be a positive for those who currently reside in areas of traffic bottlenecks, high accident areas and where there is inefficient or outdated rail transport.

That is the theory and it will be a positive if it delivers those things. The problem will be if money is just thrown at infrastructure without thought to long term planning needs and or used in marginal electorates. The program will have to be oversighted by Infrastructure Australia (is that what it's called) to ensure the money is used in the most needed areas.

As far as fiscal conseravatism goes, you could not in all seriousness call Rudd a radical. His economic stance is verging more to the conservative. I have not heard him denounce free trade or the free market economy mores the pity. Yes he has gone into deficit and probably more than we would desire but we are in a recession and if we are to offset the repercussions some spending has to be expected.

I agree that the cash handouts were ill thought although some economists argue that it did boost the retail sector but this small dent means nothing really for the long term. I also think the pink batt program is a bit dim. If you really must have a rebate, use it to extend the solar rebate across the board to make a real difference on reliance on coal.

Private health insurance rebate should be means tested. It is ridiculous we have the very wealthy getting tax back for belonging to a private health fund. It also means that health funds have no incentive for keeping premiums affordable. My health fund premium has gone up a number of times over the past 3 years and yes I will be one of the people affected by the cut to the rebate but I think it is fair.
Posted by pelican, Saturday, 16 May 2009 2:58:36 PM
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. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

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