In the recent budget papers, the current government determined that the budget will be in deficit for as far into the future as it can see with little hope that that will reverse. Consequently, national gross debt is expected to rise to $1.22 Trillion (yep with a 'T') by 2028 which is a rise of over 35% from now. Net debt goes up by a similar amount. Remember that we were in the black at the end of the Howard period to the tune of $50Billion so quite a turn-around in the space of two decades.

So given we are in an election period, what have the two majors (or most of the minors for that matter) decided to advise the electorate they will do about the growing problem? Precisely nothing.

The ALP wants to spend $10billion to build some more houses. Where? No one knows. How they'll get the tradesmen and materials without disrupting current building projects no one knows. Where they get the land required infrastructure, no one knows. Hilariously they are saying they'll build them cheaper than the private sector could. This is in addition to the decision to give away part of the deposit for a house to people who otherwise couldn't met the prudential criteria. Another billion or so which could easily double in a downturn.

This is just the latest of the reckless spending of money we don't have. Remember the $2.4 billion plus to save Whyalla. A seeming daily dose of more spending hits the airwaves each morning.

Meanwhile, not to be outdone, the Libs, who claim to be better economic managers, have decided to just give an unstructured tax cut as some sort of once only offer. But worse, they've decided to give out a tax deduction for the interests costs on new houses which is estimated to cost $1.5Billion but too open-ended to tell. They've also made a myriad other promises that get up around the $30 billion mark.

Of course both sides have promised to spend around $10Billion to make health care freer!!

The nation is in good hands </sarc>

The nation is in good hands
mhaze,
We have to chose between the Left hand & the Right hand !

Unfortunately a vote for Dutton is a vote for a Mini-Me Trump, and lots of debt. As for debt when the Noalition came to power in 2013 the national debt stood at $257 billion, (16% of GDP) when they got booted in 2022 they had racked up a debt of $895 billion, (36% of GDP) and Australia had nothing to show for it. The Noalition had been raiding the national coffers and handing out money to their mates down at the Big End of Town like drunken sailors, example $12 million for the mega rich Gerry Harvey. Labor managed to deliver two surpluses in a row, something the Noalition couldn't deliver in almost 10 years in the job.

Old rusted on conservatives like the sycophantic Trumpster mhaze, like to prattle on about their folk hero Little Johnny Howard, as if he was some kind of economic messiah, the bloke was no such thing. Howard happened to be in office during relatively good economic times, if we're going to live in the past, then the combined debt of the Australian colonies in 1855 was about 3% of GDP, and they didn't even have income tax, economic messiahs! Unfortunately the first Australian Federal government in 1901 created a national debt of 100% of GDP, or about $3 trillion in todays terms, economic wreckers!

Governments do not build houses; private enterprise builds houses. And, despite the billions the government is promising, builders are going broke because of government taxes, regulations, and interference by government.

In the meantime, Peter Dutton seems determined to lose the election with his gutlessness and back downs; and erstwhile Coalition supporters are moving to actually conservative, minor parties.

The polls are absolute crap, as is the mainstream media. They both have Labor swanning back into power - just like the US polls had a cackling madwoman winning, but Donald Trump got in with a landslide.

Something similar could occur here. We won't know until the votes are counted. All speculation is utter bullcrap.

The bitter old man is crying in his beer as usual, its all crap. Australians will make their choice as they always have, based on Australia's needs. Unlike the Un-Australian Trumpsters who want some kind of Trump America style of society for Australia. Imagine our country run by that pair of crazies, Pauline Hanson and Clive Palmer.

Paul,

A couple of things that will go over your head.

1. Yes the nation debt exploded un the last Liberal Government. But remember almost all of that was to pay for the ludicrous lockdown policies which the ALP fully supported and indeed demanded even more of and which people like Paul were fully in agreement with. It was only after the bills became due that they got prissy about it.

2. 40% (and growing) of the national debt is down to the states and this exploded in recent years since the ALP gained control of state governments. This is especially so as regards Victoria under Chairman Dan where fiscal prudence was a dirty word.

3. Somehow Howard's surpluses were due to sheer luck while Chalmer's surpluses were due to his superior skills. No bias there.

4. "Howard happened to be in office during relatively good economic times". Yeah, like the Asian Financial Crisis!!

"Pauline Hanson and Clive Palmer."

Paul seems fixated on these two. He seems to have a thing for Pauline - the name perhaps?

Neither has a the slightest chance of making any real contribution to the next parliament but they fill Paul's waking hours - and I suspect most of his nightmares.

But laughingly Paul seems to think Hanson's policies are the same as Trump's showing that he, Paul, understands neither.

The two parties now seem to have decided that housing policy is the main game and the issue that fixates the Gen Z and Millennial crowd who, its assumed, care more for their own welfare than they do for the welfare of the nation.

Consequently both parties are throwing all sorts of goodies at these people to try to convince them that they can resolved the so-called Housing Crisis without actually doing the things needed to resolve the faux crisis.

One of the main causes is immigration. Bring in 500,000 new people and you have to find accommodation for them. Building new housing for half that number and, hey presto....crisis. Reduce the number of immigrants reduces the crisis. But neither side is really addressing that, although the Libs have made some half-hearted assertions they'll do some cutting on immigration.

But remember both sides like immigration. Without it, the current government would have been in almost permanent recession, The Libs like new immigrants because business likes new immigrants who provide both new consumers and new workers to keep wages low.

So the one main measure that will address the Housing Crisis is the one measure that's off the table. And therefore we get all these quick fixes to paper over the problem and convince the Millennials that answers are sought.

Smoke and mirrors.

The country's in the best of hands.

The country's in the best of hands.
maze,
Don't give up your Day Job to pursue a career as a Comedian !

There are some champion wafflers here !
I think it is impossible to get government building the number of
houses needed in any reasonable time.
Ask them how they are going with their 22000 solar panels a day.
Now there is a very simple job. Not a bloody hope of doing it.
They just do not understand how difficult it is to get big projects up
and running, so they just blurt it out !
Want half a million houses, no a full million, thanks.
If I was doing the job,(1st I would refuse it);
but there are a few preliminaries;
I would stop immigration, except for building tradesmen from the UK.
They would need little adaption to Australian regulations and rules.
I would advertise for building tradesmen in other countries.
I would call for tenders for the type of small portable houses which
are built in a factory and available today and for a few hundred of
them to be installed somewhere outside of cities and make them
available for young couples who have signed up for a government house.
When their government house becomes available they would then move.
In that time they might have 1 or 2 children which they would have
otherwise put off.
This one factor would be a great advantage to society.
As I see it now, the government of either flavour are completely out
of their depth.

Trumpster please keep up on events;

"Renegade senator Pauline Hanson has bucked her parliamentary colleagues, backing the Trump administration’s move to up-end global trade policy and slug Australia with sweeping aluminium and steel tariffs."

"Despite bipartisan condemnation of the trade barriers, the One Nation Leader endorsed the controversial levies, and said she supported Mr Trump’s push to “protect American industries and manufacturing and jobs in America”

Like you mhaze, Hanson is un-Australian, putting Trump and his disastrous tariff policies before the interest of Australia.

I say Paul has a thing for Pauline and to prove it Paul's very next post is all about Pauline.

Paul and Pauline sitting in a tree.....

The only person who cares what Pauline says, it seems is Paul.

Meanwhile, in the adult world, I've been scouring the various sites covering all the promises from the Libs, Labs and Greens and haven't fond a single policy yet from any of them concerning plans to reduce spending anywhere. That's expected from the Greens who never saw a government cheque they didn't swoon over, but you'd hope the other two would show a tad of a nod to the debt crisis the nation faces.

But alas.

I wonder how much worse things will have to get before the electorate wakes up. Or will we just continue spending money we haven't got and sending the bill to the grandkids for a few more decades hoping that something will just come up.

Indyvidual

The country's in the best of hands.

Ever heard of irony, Indyvidual?

Trumpster you are fixated with Donald Trump, you cult worship the buffoon, you hang off every Trumpism uttered.

Claim there was nothing to link your pin up gal The Lovely Pauline to Trump, I show you there is, like you, Pauline is a Orange Man sycophant. Move The Goal Posts Again! I once though you had a reasonable IQ, somewhere around 50, but with your utterances lately me thinks its TLA.

BTW, You once claimed you were in charge of a polling booth on election day. What a joke that would be, You would be stuffing the ballot box with Fat Clive votes.

$10Billion to make health care freer!!
maze,
That amount of money doesn't convey the notion of "free' to me. Not to have to pay does not make it free, not by a long shot ! Everything & I mean everything is being paid for indirectly by most of us. There's enough money for all however, the distribution is manipulated & mismanaged, more often than not in a criminal fashion ! We have a User pays up front system in which absolutely nothing is free.
Just do some calculations one day & see how much you have left out of a Dollar by the time you've had every tax deducted ! Then do another calculation & see how much money is leaving the country to places laughing at us !

Indy,

Are you talking about all that free aged welfare, well over $60 billion last year. As you say; "is being paid for indirectly by most of us" MOST is the operative word, taxpayers that is.

Some people are so dopy, I'm sure this bloke lives in a cave; "Governments do not build houses; private enterprise builds houses"

"The NSW Housing Commission built 18% of all housing built in NSW, during the 1960s. By 1969, they had sold almost 100,000 dwellings, which was one-third of what they had built."

That's when Australia's population grew from 10 million to 12.5 million.

We know the Noalition added about $650 billion to the national debt during their time in office. Although they spent like drunken sailors splurging billions on their mates from the Big End of Town, with nothing to show for it, Australia's debt as a percentage of GDP isn't all that bad when compared to many others;

Australia 43.8%
Britain 97.6%
Canada 108%
USA 122%
Japan 255%
NZ 39.3%
China 83.4%

Australia's national debt is lower than about every country in Europe

Paul1405,
One would hope that Australia's debt is less with 25 million people in comparison to countries with 80-100 million.
47% is probably a figure from 25 years ago.

Indy,

Percentage has nothing do do with actual amount, its parts per 100. Sorry you never made it to high school to learn about percentages.

"Australia's debt is less with 25 million people in comparison to countries with 80-100 million. 47% is probably a figure from 25 years ago."

Me thinks to much aged welfare being spent on the terps again. 47 is your IQ not a percentage.