In the 5 years to June 30 2008 Fed government taxation rose from $9853 per capita to $13,451pc, at a rate about twice that of official inflation. Source ABS.

Rudds cash splash and stimulus programmes are designed to take up the slack at a time when banks are less willing to loan and people and business are less willing to go into debt and more inclined to pay off existing debts.

The Rudd deficit this year will be at least $25B and maybe up to $35B. This from a $20B surplus in one year amounts to a possible $55B turnaround in one year. And nobody is talking about the large increase in taxes around the corner to pay for this.

Please note I am not blaming the Rudd govt. for the crisis upon us, merely questioning his economically conservative approach, and whether there are other approaches they could take.

It is estimated that another 500,000 of us will be unemployed(12%) within a year, and some who put the figure considerably higher. Govt outlays will increase again to support these numbers.

My question is as follows; maybe given that deficit spending is infra dig would a $50B decrease in taxation achieve more than an increase in spending? Dumping payroll tax would make employment cheaper. Company tax decreases would help businesses and a couple grand less personal tax each would help us all to pay off mortgages, credit cards etc and potentially leave industry and individuals in a stronger position to pay the increased taxes in the future.

I suspect any decrease in company tax, payroll tax or whatever would go to the company heads and shareholders, and not lead to any noticeable increase in employment, it's the way they seem to operate these days, look at the Banks behaviour of late. Can you honestly see any Board saying.."Oh look, our taxes have gone down, lets hire more people, or increase wages?". Executive bonuses would be a far more likely outcome.

exactly Maximilion

Better to find the poorest of the poor and give it to them. They are the only ones guaranteed to spend every cent and on mostly local goods and services.

Stimulus will not work,What must happen is the cutting of G0ovt spending,Kevin is rattling the socialist heelbarrow

Better to find the poorest of the poor and give it to them. They are the only ones guaranteed to spend every cent and on mostly local goods and services.

Yep, just like the pensioners wasted $15 millon of tax payers money on the pokies before Xmas hey.Fact!

Most poor people are poor through thier own doing.

Sure there are the genuine cases, but seriously, no one can be rich if they work a normal mon-fri 9-5 job.

Then there are the ones who CHOOSE TO HAVE 5 children when they simply can't afford them and they expect someone else to pay.

Then there are the bludgers who just expect everthing for nothing. AND STILL WHINGE!

I don't agree with handing out money but if we have to I recon it's great to see some of the ones who paid the taxes finnaly get something back

Ax for payroll tax. My brother has two restaurants and was considering a third, except, this will force him into the payroll tax bracket which will be a burdon on all three businesses, not just the third.

He currently pays around $800,000 per annum in wages. If he goes to I think 1 mill then he will have to pay an additional % in taxes based on all three businesses.

It's a joke. One gets punished for creating jobs. Go figure hey!

So there goes a possible eight to ten more jobs hey, just like that.

I spoke to a friend of mine yesterday, who operates a small
business working on mining machinery. There is huge demand
for what he does and there is no way he can cope with the
workload.

He could hire a number of people and expand, but he says
it is simply not worth it. Employees rock up and they
all seem to know their list of entitlements, but few
want to actually do too much for the money. So why bother
hiring them?

Australians voted against workchoices it seems, but I think
that one day it might hit them that it was a mistake.
They will need some really high unemployment numbers to
learn the hard way.

Small business will soon hire people, if the work that those
people are doing, is actually making them a profit. If it
is just turning over money, or profits are just going to
keep up with the many claimed entitlements, then many simply
won't bother.

All the cash splashes in the world are not going to change that.

If I was to start another business, which would be easy to do,
it would be a flat rate of so much an hour, all included. If that
is not possible, as I have no surety from customers, I can't give
employees surety, in an ever changing world. So why bother to
take the risk?

Let them all go and work for Worksafe and other Govt organisations
and they can police each other. Let Kevi wear the risk.