foyle quote/...''In Australia at the moment
private debt is about 160% of GDP."""

yep good point
but ol barnaby got screamed down
when he started taklking about state debt

then for qld alone[with the same populationas greece]
at 65 billion...turning over in 2012 to 75 billion

and them selling state forrest for only 800 million
[35,000 hectares less than one hour from cbc city center]

had they been subdived..and sold as housing
[future housing..after harvest of the forrest]
the sale of 35.000 hectare blocks alone would have cleared the whole debt

instead they got only..less than 4/5ths
a billion..[800 million]

barely covering partial intrest

[quote]
Why is the government debt considered a problem
when that private debt isn't?
[/quote]
cause the states are broke
selling off the peoples assets for pennies
whiole bailing out their party mates

[like the half a billion peter beaty gave
to make a magnesium plant in gladstone
topped up with another half a billion from howard

for a plant that never got built..!
the billion went direct to those shareholders
who bought into nice easy govt cash cash scam..name names

anyhow i heard that there is two fiffernt 'debts.
those official govt those held by govt dept
recall the loans on power to give giovt ursury payments on the state odious debt

odious debt is ctriminal
investers loose

but wait..we can get more
govt debt to bail ya out mate
and ya still get ya xmass bonus

if your NOT a peon
ie too big
to allow..1%..you..to fail

mates rates wearing blacksuits
when they should be wearing stripes
for their *treason..to the people AND..*their estates

get their trust funds
tax THEIR..transactions

not just smokers*

About all a surplus achieves is less money for infrastructure. To grow you borrow money. There is no problem with that, Au economy is in excess of 1 trillion $, Your 250 million $ is some what meak, baz.
Countries and businesses borrow money. It's not essential for govt; to show a surplus, we do not have share holders. But toni is hell bent on a surplus , so be it. Some will miss out.

Getting into surplus is not vitally important. The failure to keep one's word of which this Government have become masters of is the main issue. How can you expect the general community to tell the truth when much of what this Government says is not. What makes it worse is that right from day one they really had no intention of doing so. I think it was Peter Garret who summed it up that they would say anything to get into power and then do what they want once they got there. The deceit is the issue not the deficit.

579 said;
Au economy is in excess of 1 trillion $, Your 250 million $ is some what meak, baz.

It is not $250 Million, it is $250 BILLION !

It was raised by parliament from $225 Billion to $250 billion earlier
this year but has now got up to $237 billion last I saw a month or two back.
The government is increasing borrowing at around $2 billion a week.
See office of financial management web site.

Let us remind ourselves for a moment of the essential nature of a budget surplus.

It happens when the amount collected in taxation from businesses and from the citizenry in general, exceeds the amount required by the government for its own purposes. A surplus can also, of course, be engineered, or at least helped along, by cutting public services.

It would therefore appear that we have come to regard excessive taxation and niggardly government spending as virtues, in and of themselves.

How did that happen?

And you're looking only at the end result, the Blue Cross, and ignoring the process. My suggestion was that we deserve better from our political class, to which you observed...

>>We deserve what we get from them, having voted for them all.<<

The only people voted for are the actual politicians. I was suggesting that we are let down by the entire political class, from the sleazy pre-selection processes, compulsory voting that forces you to choose between individuals that you wouldn't feed to your cat, through to the corruption of lobbyists, special interest groups and rent-seekers.

All of whom seem to be able to award themselves any amount of our money, whenever they feel like it. Subject of course to token input from tame "consultants", who are paid squillions to deliver a report that concurs with the public servants' own estimation of their value.

A plague a' both your houses! I am sped.

Dear Bazz,

Again I'm going to quote from someone who knows more
about this issue than I do. It's from the article I
cited earlier. Here goes:

"Step back from all the sound and fury about
budget surpluses and the European debt crisis
for a moment, and have an unbiased look at the
latest Treasury's figures on the health of
Australia's economy."

"Unemployment is expected to peak at 5.5 per cent next
year, and remain at that level into 2013. Inflation will
be 3.25 per cent. Wages will grow at 4 per cent. Consumer
spending will grow at 3 per cent, and the economy as a
whole at 3.25 per cent. These are figures that would make
finance ministers in Europe weep. The Australian economy
is growing. We're adding jobs and keeping unemployment
low, consumers are still spending, and inflation is modest.
And yes, the budget will return to surplus."

They may not be an outstanding set of numbers but they do
show that Australian growth will be moderate instead of
booming - but in comparison to our Northern hemisphere
trading partners - as the author points out - "they're
almost utopian."

You can argue that our economy is not enjoying the frothy
exuberance of 2007. But you can't argue or deny that this
is still a world-beating performance and the fact that our
economy is ticking along nicely. These figures suggest that
this could be the best Christmas for retailers in several
years. BTW: - It is predicted that Australia will be one
of the only countries in the OECD to enjoy a balanced budget
in the near future. I'm afraid that few people would take
what Mr Barnaby Joyce says about numbers very seriously.