themonk:>> Sonofgloin
You are wrong when you state the banks were in no trouble during the GFC.The NAB and Westpac borrowed close to $20 billion from the American Fed to resolve their liquidity problems but have not informed the public,<<

Themonk, well I am pleased that most of what I write gets your seal of approval, but if I may address the above statement.

If your criteria for "trouble" re the impact of the GFC on Australia is the banks having to compete with broke Northern Hemisphere govts for "credit" from the Rothchilds and associates then yes we had trouble. What that means in practical terms is that our banks are borrowing at 3% and charging us 7%. Pre the GFC our banks were borrowing at around 1-5% from the European money lenders. When you talk about the American Fed you are talking about the Rothchilds and associates European banking cartel. There is no American Federal Reserve as such, the Fed is a consortium of the previously mentioned European banks.

If your criteria for “trouble” is an immediate spike in unemployment, a historically high residential and commercial foreclosure rate and the dual plagues of the redemption of loans on call and a tightening of credit within a matter of weeks then Australian banks did not have “trouble” they had market fluctuation.

Further to that Australian banks borrow largely from our savings accounts - the money we've stashed away, some $1200 Billion at the time of the GFC as that is the amount to which our government guaranteed personal savings accounts. I don’t know what $20 Billion you are talking about, but Australia's big banks will need to borrow more than $130 billion from local and overseas markets in the next year to help fund their lending books, predominantly for housing.

Just as a side bar, we are borrowing 100 Billion to fund our financial system next year, and Gillard wants to spend $40 Billion + on holes and cables....imbecile in action, reality has fled from her left and right hemispheres, does she know what a BILLION is?

Dear NSB,

Few people will deny that the planet has a finite amount of resources or that it can tolerate only a limited amount of
pollution. If world population continues to grow rapidly, if industrialisation spreads around the world, and if population and resource depletion continue at an increasing rate - and all these things are happening - where is human society headed?
Sad that some people don't seem to care about the future. Only what's in it for me.

Hi Lexi,
Well said...I don't know how old some of these members are, but they seem to reflect some of the younger ones today who appear to be only interested in themselves or adopt the philosophy that tends to 'let other people sort it out'.....pity.
I like your intelligent posts, well done Lexi.
NSB

NSB:>> It annoys me that because one party doesn't satisfy everybody in Oz, it doesn't mean that they are bad, both the Major Parties have stuffed up big time, in one way or another,<<

Noisy at this point we must inject relativity into the discussion; let’s consider landmark Australian government achievements:

Record national debt accrued by a government since Federation...LABOR
Record time to accumulate national debt by a government...LABOR
Record extension of government debt ceiling legislation...LABOR
Record failed national projects (in implementation or design)...LABOR
Record abandoned projects (after implementation)...LABOR
Record public service numbers...LABOR
Record spent on consultants (spin docs)...LABOR
Record spent on media releases...LABOR
Record "cost of government in a single term" since Federation...LABOR
Record national "cost of living" rises under a government...LABOR

I dunno , there seems to be a clear winner there to me. The AUSTRALIAN Labor Party is gone, the ethos of the souls who fought for equality and fair and equitable government support by way of pensions and social stipends is gone, it all went when more lawyers than boilermakers filled the benches.

NSB>> whilst most people disagree with policies (both real and imagined), they see a policy which will suit their ethos<<

If we are talking Gillard and her band of faithful failures could someone keep us informed of what Bob says her ethos is for today?

Dear NSB,

Thanks for your kind words. As I stated in my earlier post - the
politicians of both the Coalition and the ALP have performed well -
that is at what they've set out to do. Both need to hold the centre, for without middle Australia, each is done for. The Coalition wants the growing inequality of income, wealth and power distribution to keep going. The ALP wants to tone it down a bit. Many voters ask -
why do we have two parties? Because as someone pointed out - because a stick has two ends: a proverbial sh@tty one, and a sweet one. Each party tries to hand the other's constituency the end it prefers they have. The oalition does that best, I grant you. And as we can see this is Mr Abbott's own last grasp for power. He has nothing to offer but slogans and vacuous performances.

Noisy,
If I belonged to a party that had made so many costly failures and stuff ups as the present mob in Canberra, I would resign out of shame. We are talking billions and billions of taxpayers dollars simply wasted with no or little benefit.

I am not just dissatisified, I am very angry at the waste when I think of all the benefits of infrastructure, and so on, that could have been achieved with the funds.

This mob in power do not deserve your, or my, support because of their foolishness.

They have gone from a bank surplus to an incredible ammount of debt, which will have to be repaid, with interest. They have spent like drunken sailors and we are left with the debt. They should not get another go at our wallets and purses.

The sooner they are gone the better for everyone in Aus.