<< ...there is only one example of unlimited growth in nature ..... its called C A N C E R !! >>

There is no example of unlimited growth in nature. Cancer stops growing when it kills its host!

But yes praxidice, unlimited growth is absolutely core to the issue at hand.

It’s no good denigrating Swannie. I doubt that anyone could do a significantly better job in the circumstances. They might have been able to make it sound a little less ridiculous, but the major budgetary issues would remain.

One of the really big things… and I’m not saying it is the only thing… is to address growth - to strive to curtail the ever-increasing demand for everything that is being imposed upon us via very high immigration by our stupid government, of either persuasion.

The nature of this discussion and most others like it on OLO gives a pretty good indication of how the whole community feels about the issue….. and there is scant little concern being expressed about the constant pursuance of growth, and forever faster growth at that.

We certainly need a new political paradigm – one that will strive with a vengeance to balance the demand for everything with the supply capability, with a big safety margin. That is; to achieve a sustainable future.

The roots of this are within Labor. There's no sign of it within the Lib camp. Bob Carr is excellent on this subject and Gillard has expressed a genuine desire to achieve a sustainable Australia.

But they are a million miles away from doing this.

Well perhaps if all those that commented on the budget, finances, and anything pertaining to these, would call for an end to mindless expansionism, we might have a chance of positively influencing government.

It's not just the government that is at fault here. The people, the ordinary citizens, are sadly letting themselves down by not urging their guvment along in the right direction.

THIS is what we need to concentrate on. Anything else, in the absence of this, is just rearranging the deck-chairs!

Most of the comments so far have shown that the poster does not understand money theory.

Warren Mosler, an American billionaire supporter of the University of Missouri, Kansas City, was the subject of a SMH article Saturday. Every poster on this article should read what was said. The article is at;

http://www.smh.com.au/business/-2jdfz.html

New Economic Perspectives has an excellent short article on the subject generally at;

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/category/stephanie-kelton

Modern theory has shown conclusively that budget surpluses are bound to reduce employment and reduce private financial holdings when foreign trade is in balance.

A reduction in government expenditure cannot help but reduce demand as will an increase in tax, particularly a tax imposed on the lower end of the income spectrum. The budget can only be balanced by one or the other or mixtures of both.

The trick for a competent government is to get as close as possible to full employment (2-4% of total underemployment?)and keep inflation low. The Labor Government has kept inflation reasonable and it would be a game Reserve Bank which didn't closely follow what the government wants in that regard.

Australia needs a deficit budget to try and further reduce total underemployment which is currently 12+%.

Over the business cycle the total budget deficit can be at least as great as the increase in GDP.

Peter Costello claims that he and Howard produced an overall budget surplus. If they did it was by selling assets and who would suggest the Future Fund could by back, with $60 billion, the Commonwealth Bank, Telstra, various airports and everything else sold. They also allowed private debt, particularly on home mortgages and credit cards, to increase alarmingly

If those assets were still owned by and for the Common Good how much would they be returning to the income side of the Federal Budget.

Please do some sensible thinking about the facts.

No problem :)

I really don't perceive any significant difference between any of the existing political parties, even the smaller ones like the Greens, the CDP & the KAP. They are all primarily there for their own benefit and that of their friends / cronies / campaign contributors / whatever multinational. None of the clowns give a rats about their constituents. They are all full of male bovine droppings. All major parties are the home of failed lawyers (easily the most avaricious species ever to evolve on planet earth).

How any supposedly sentient being can favour one particular mob of bloodsucking parasites over an other escapes me. I used to think a parliament composed wholly of intependents would be a good thing, but then that hitherto halfway 'respectable' clown Peter Wellington (some Sunshine Coast electorate) sided with GoAnna the Blight to repeal double jeopardy law in Queensland. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

I think whats even more relevant these days is that few if any significant decisions (particularly at a federal level) are made by the bloodsucking parasites we've installed in Canberra. Example, I have a problem with companies like Tel$tra / Optu$ etc making their money here but employing 'cheap' offshore labour. Thats both morally unethical but also discriminatory in my book. I was told by the QLD Discrimination mob that they are only interested in male / female & straight / gay discrimination. The federal tribe informed me that there can be no offence of racial discrimination because 'Australians are not a race'. OK, look a little further & one finds virtually identical wording in UK, US, Irish republic & Canadian laws.

What lunatic is promoting what amounts to treasonous laws ?? ... gotta be the United Nations. What bothers me is what else is the UN up to in so called 'developed' countries ?? Meanwhile the sheeple are paying the red-headed witch, the dying duck, the RAbbott & a host more utter incompetents a kings ransom supposedly to run the country on behalf of said sheeple, but in reality they are merely figureheads & someone else is pulling the strings.

I notice that the government supporters on here are saying how bad it
will be under the coalition, and do the rest of us expect it all to be perfect.
Well, no, I think the majority of us are more realistic, which is why we do not support the Labour/Greens coalition.
There will be quite significant problems as they try to wind down the excessive expenditure, such as borrowing from China to give aid to China !
All parties have ignored the observable fact that growth the world over is declining. It is greatest in the southern European states and less here, but the politicians will struggle to rebuild the economy while they do not recognise the cause of the problem.

The Labour/Greens will have an absolute party as they tear strips off the new government for every "attack on the working class" but they themselves do not understand what is going on right under their noses.

The decline in growth is as inevitable as the sun coming up in the morning and all we can hope is that the Lib/Nats realise it quicker than Labour ever would. There are solutions to the problem that would give a very happy and satisfactory life for people but I am afraid it will have to be imposed on the government by the people going ahead with the necessary changes while the government still thinks it is running the show.

Mr Swan has deserved every bit of criticism for Labours total economic incompetence. Don't forget however the Greens wanted the lying deceitful carbon price at $50 tonne. Besides being incompetent, being in bed with the Greens has been Labours biggest crimes. How proud Oakshott and Windsor must feel supporting open and unaccountable incompetence.

I found that interesting!
Runner talking about who is in bed with who.
Parentage seems to be often on runners mind.
Do we all, well answer is no! silly question, understand both Oakshot and the member for northern table lands took National party seats, in both state then federal, and held/hold them?
Those cow cockys knew and liked both.
Windsor was a legend when he propped up a state Liberal coalition government.
But LOL! Traitor for not doing other than he thought right.