Were we every out of it? Not twelve months ago, and for some time after the three wise monkeys running the economic management of Australia, Prime Minister Morrison, Treasurer Frydenberg, and Finance Minister Cormann were yelling from the roof tops "We are back in the BLACK!" How false that claim has proven to be, it was simply untrue.
What was a possible wafer thin surplus, is rapidly turning into a sizeable deficit. These infallible economic geniuses, as they seemed to claim they were, have proven to be rather ordinary economic managers. The same three were highly critical of the Rudd Governments "socialists" economic stimulus package during the GFC in 2009, now with the economy in rapid decline the same bods wheeled out a similar "socialists" economic stimulus package yesterday to try and deal with the coronavirus. Will this package keep Australia out of a recession, I very much doubt it, more a case of too little too late, from these very poor economic managers. BTW; How good Socialism looks to the Capitalists when times get tough for them.

Yeah, agreed.

I just don't how these dills failed to forecast the Wuhan Virus a year ago.....oh wait.

" BTW; How good Socialism looks to the Capitalists when times get tough for them."

Yep, I bet we all wish we were living under the Chinese system now.

Dear Paul,

I'm actually going to give them some credit for the $750 cash handout to the unemployed and pensioners. Everyone knows this is how you stimulate spending as these groups will generally pump it straight back into the economy. It would have been a really anathema for them to do it too, but it's happening so hats off.

The tax cuts from last year really only impacted those on $45,000 and above from memory and there was consternation within coalition ranks as to why there was so little stimulus as a result. As anyone with half a brain would know it went straight to paying down mortgages.

They are mirroring a Rudd initiative which they had so roundly criticised in the past. Why? Because it works.

Why? Because it works.
SteeleRedux,
Crap ! Rudd had Costello's futures fund to raid, Morrison doesn't have that luxury !

Dear individual,

Mate, you are an outright shocker. We have been through this before and after providing the figures I thought you had accepted them. Rudd did not raid any future fund instead he and Swann increased it.

I will paste them again.

Quote

Oh good lord mate. Labour not only didn't raid it they created 4 accompanying funds.

“In his 2008 Australian federal budget speech, the Treasurer, Wayne Swan announced three new "Nation-Building Funds", also to be managed by the Future Fund Board. These included a $20 billion Building Australia Fund to invest in roads, rail, ports and broadband; an $11 billion Education Investment Fund, which absorbed the $6 billion Higher Education Endowment Fund set up by the previous government; and a $10 billion Health and Hospital Fund. In that budget and the following 2009 federal budget, the Labor Rudd Government promised A$41 billion to create these new funds.”
Wikipedia

The total funds held under management, as at 31 December each year, inclusive of funds held in the Building Australia Fund, the Health and Hospitals Fund, the Education Investment Fund and the DisabilityCare Australia Fund, are:

Date
(31 Dec) Total funds
(billions) Notes

2008 Increase to A$59.62
2009 Increase to A$87.23
2010 Increase to A$90.51
2011 Decrease to A$89.39
2012 Increase to A$94.96
2013 Increase to A$107.36
2014 Increase to A$119.47
2015 Increase to A$128.5
2016 Increase to A$139.5
2017 Decrease to A$138.9
2018 Increase to A$147.0

So you can see the largest additions to the fund have been under Labour governments.

End quote.

Yet here you are again propagating a lie. Give it up.

Hi Steele,

Given the circumstance we find the economy in, a first round stimulus package consisting of direct payments is absolutely necessary. The economy has been on the slide for well over a year now, and the government, despite warnings, has left it up to the Reserve Bank to try and boost the economy through monetary policy, mainly interest rate cuts, which have not succeeded. With the bushfires, and now the much more economically serious Coronavirus, incidentally I perceive the Coronavirus as a greater threat than the GFC, it would be totally irresponsible for the government to have done nothing.

What is the opinion of some of the 'Usual Suspect' on the forum, who if I recall correctly, rubbished Rudd for taking direct action at the time of the GFC. This government took every opportunity to claim Labor was reckless with its economic management, placing the country into deficit. At the time it was deficit or deep recession, Labor correctly chose deficit. Now the boofheads claimed a surplus when no such surplus existed, and is unlikely to exist for some years to come. Are they really the great economic managers, or simply economic fools who don't know what they are doing.

Hi Mhaze; "I just don't how these dills failed to forecast the Wuhan Virus a year ago." Of course mere economic mortals could not forecast such an event, but for the three economic gurus ScumO', Friedbrain and Cornball its would be child's play. In fact when they made the ridiculous claim "We are back in the BLACK!" it was pointed out to them that was not necessarily the case, unforeseen events could spoil the picnic. Our economic super hero's looked ahead and declared there was nothing on the horizon that could stop their economic miracle from working!

Dud Dutton has tested positive to Coronavirus. Well ScumO' and the rest of the motley crew will have to be locked up for two weeks!

if not for the billions wasted on renewables, the billions wasted to dumb down education (thanks Gonski) and the billion plus to abc we probably would be doing ok. We can be thankful Morrison and Dutton stopped the mass illegal immigration costing billions and that even though they have totally overspent they saved us from Greens/Labour who don't know what a surplus is. Yes the Liberals have been economic vandals but compared to the wreckers of Greens/Labour they look good.

End quote.
SteeleRedux,
Your quotes are the ones you, on behalf of Labor, want us to see. How about showing us the figures of the non-public Service crowd in private enterprise who went under or almost went because of these policies ?

Well Paul, if you're triggered by this loss of a promised surplus, you must have been apoplectic between 2008 and 2012 when Wayne Swann promised a surplus pretty much every year and failed to deliver even one.

Paul, you must have been beside yourself in rage. Or like all good lefties, have you erased that little problem from your memory?

Actually, its very much a feature of the new age to confuse predictions for established facts. I recall that one of the first examples of this was in the mid 2000s when the ALP was countering the actual unemployment figure by claiming that they had a lower 'target' and that somehow that target trumped reality. It happens everywhere on both sides where projections become reality in their mind.

Of course the best example is global warming where, in the minds of the hysterics, model projections are a substitute for reality. Deaths from disasters down? Oh yeah but we predict they'll go up so we're-all-gunna-die.

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” ....Ronald Reagan.

All quiet on the Leftist front !

Mhaze, there is a difference between a projected surplus, as Swan was claiming, and a "We are back in in the BLACK!" lying nonsense as claimed by the three Stooges, ScumO', Friedbrain and Cornball! If its left up to the nincompoops running the show to deal with the coronavirus, all I can say is we are in deep sh!t! And you better believe it.

Look at that total dill Trump, his job is to propagate misinformation to the American half wits, and the rest of the world. The fool says "It's a foreign virus", when the truth is just the opposite. Now who is putting out the "fake news"..... well?

Hey SteeleRedux,

"I'm actually going to give them some credit for the $750 cash handout to the unemployed and pensioners."

I think there's more to it, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.
I think ScoMo is concerned about the elderly, women kids and unemployed on welfare.
I think he's giving those most vulnerable during the pandemic a fighting chance to stock up on essentials before the worst of it hits, which might be 6 to 8 weeks away.
I think he's concerned about how people fare during the crisis, which will have a marked impact on how quickly the country can bounce back afterwards.

And once all is said and done, and the smoke clears for those who make it through, he's less likely to be left in such a position that he might be criticised for not doing enough.
In this way it's actually a savvy political decision that helps ensure the governments re-election if they manage the crisis situation better than other nations, and is seen as responsible decision making.

I think it's a hell of a lot of money, but all things considered probably quite sensible and it might save a lot of lives and prevent those who were complacent or unprepared from having to break self-isolation or quarantine to steal from others when things get tough.

Paul1405.
No, there's no difference at all. Swan also announced and tried to take credit for a surplus that didn't exist. If anything, he was even worse, making the promise to achieve a surplus "come hell or high water". Even if that were deliverable (which it wasn't) it would have been reckless; a competent treasurer would have instead promised not to compromise our nation's economic interests to meet short term financial objectives!

Unfortunately most of the people don't realise that a surplus just means the government takes more money out of the economy than it puts in. They think surpluses are good for their own sake, and have never understood their real purpose (which is controlling inflation while keeping interest rates low). Unfortunately it's remarkably difficult to dispel the lie that any deficits the present government runs must be paid off by future generations.

Paul wrote: " there is a difference between a projected surplus, as Swan was claiming, and a "We are back in in the BLACK!"

Yes but as much as your one-eye won't see it the former was worse. Swann basically used the fictitious future surplus as a weapon to deflect all attempts to rectify the budget mess. The surplus was never going to happen but the Pauls' of the world totally bought it. They only became budget sceptics when the colour of the government changed. Hypocrisy is never a good look.

"The fool says "It's a foreign virus"".
Well it is a virus that originated in China. But I see that China is now issuing propaganda to deflect from their utter culpability here and the usual anti-US flying monkeys are falling into line. They always do.

Aidan,
"Unfortunately it's remarkably difficult to dispel the lie that any deficits the present government runs must be paid off by future generations."

That's right.....it gets paid off by the tooth fairy.

Hey Mhaze,

Are you a virologist who studies infectious diseases?

"Well it is a virus that originated in China. But I see that China is now issuing propaganda to deflect from their utter culpability here and the usual anti-US flying monkeys are falling into line. They always do."

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/wuhan-seafood-market-may-not-be-source-novel-virus-spreading-globally

Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease specialist at Georgetown University:
- Want to argue with him?

Lucey says if the new data are accurate, the first human infections must have occurred in November 2019—if not earlier—because there is an incubation time between infection and symptoms surfacing. If so, the virus possibly spread silently between people in Wuhan—and perhaps elsewhere—before the cluster of cases from the city’s now-infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was discovered in late December. “The virus came into that marketplace before it came out of that marketplace,” Lucey asserts.

Heres a better timeline of events:

Locking down of Fort Detrich
http://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/05/health/germs-fort-detrick-biohazard.html

Japanese infected in Hawaii in September by Coronovirus.

Wuhan Military Games 18 Oct - 27 Oct
- Members of the US military personnel hospitalised in Wuhan for an 'undetermined infections'.

First Chinese case reported November 17

Wuhan version of the virus can only have come from the US.
- Because it is what's known as a 'branch', which could not have been created first, because it would have no 'seed'.
It would have had to be a new variety that spun off the original trunk, and that only existed in the US.
The only way it would have gotten there was if someone put it there.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/china-coronavirus-shocking-update/5705196
http://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-further-evidence-virus-originated-us/5706078

Get your bloody facts straight, all of you.

OMG you people are stupid.
You hear one little term 'conspiracy theory' and then you think you know something, you know nothing; too frightened to look into the facts because someone said 'conspiracy theory'.

Do you think because the site is called 'insider' that you assume you're some kind of 'insider'?

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman pushes coronavirus conspiracy theory that the US Army 'brought the epidemic to Wuhan'
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/chinese-official-says-us-army-maybe-brought-coronavirus-to-wuhan-2020-3?r=US&IR=T

It's all BS, they're just telling you what they want you to hear.

Globalresearch? Seriously? You call that 'the facts'?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch

mhaze,
You miss the point completely. No generation is under any obligation to pay off the government's debt. Australia has unlimited credit and is immortal, so will never have to reach a position of zero debt.

Hey mhaze,
Yeah, well RationalWiki is supported by Snopes, Washington Post and the Guardian.
Is that where you get your info from?

I don't make the news, I just share it.
You regurgitate useful idiot narratives.

mhaze, like you I see thing from my political perspective, which is what you would describe as "leftwing", something opposite to your own view, you are no more even handed than I am. I point to the fact that the wiz brains were lying when they claimed the budget was back in the black, and your defence of these liars is "Well Labor did it also!", is that some kind of defence according to you. Swan if he lied, and he probably did somewhere along the way, suffered the consequences, namely the loss of office. Should the gang of wiz brains you are trying to defend also suffer the same fate?

Did Morrison go along to the football? Me thinks not, ScumO' would have scored an own goal if he had. Also, despite the sudden change of rules regarding contact with Coronavirus hard case Dutton, and the its all okay till Monday nonsense, Morrison is being tested for the virus. BTW my footy team the South Sydney Rabbitohs, did the ScumO' mob 22-18, before a dismal crowd of about 2700.

Armchair asks: "RationalWiki is supported by Snopes, Washington Post and the Guardian.Is that where you get your info from?"

Well they're not my first choice of reliable sources, but they are orders of magnitude more reliable than Globalresearch. How anyone could give a site that writes of North Korea as being 'A Land of Human Achievement, Love and Joy' even a second thought is beyond ration understanding.

Aidan,

I didn't miss the point. I just utterly reject your point. Future generations will pay for current borrowing in lower standards of living than would otherwise be the case.

Paul,
Nowhere will you find me defending the current government's surplus forecasts. Since you are so partisan you assume everyone else is as well. But not so.

I'm in favour of budgetary rectitude but a surplus isn't a surplus until its banked no matter who claims it. My main beef is with the trend toward treating forecasts, predictions and targets as established facts. It grows out of governmental inability to deliver and the electorates anxiety to be misled.

Not so Mhaze, defence by deflection "the former was worse", you use that irrelevant fact as an excuse to mitigate to the actions of the present regime, the one you favour. What, when discussing the present lie by these clowns does the actions of another clown 10 years ago have relevance? Other than you political view wants to favour the present clowns.

Paul,

You can't get your mind around this, can you? I'm not partisan in this. I'm not trying to defend the current government. I DIDN'T vote for it. Although I didn't so much vote for the ALP as vote against the Libs.

But I'm not outraged by the 'lost' surplus. It was always going to be ephemeral at best. It was always a promise made without much conviction for electoral rather than fiscal purposes. As are almost all government promises these days.

I'm not raising one example to defend another. All I was doing was showing, with your help, that your outrage at this lost surplus wasn't based on principle but on taking sides. That is, the outrage was hypocritical.

I think people are smart enough to know that had Dutton, Morrison and Abbott not stopped the boats our ecomony would be far worse and risk of disease and terrorism far higher. People are also smart enough that anyone believing and pushing for zero emissions are total frauds or economic vandal or both.

Mhaze, I can not be "offended" by something claimed that I know never existed, that being a nonexistent surplus. I would be no more offended had the lying fools claimed to have (nonexistent) rainbows to dole out to the populace. What is offensive is claiming something that you know to be a lie, and feeding that lie to the public.
You and I must be in the same boat, I also didn't vote for Liberal or Labor at the last election.

BTW, I don't agree with this leftwing/rightwing tag, to me there are only moderates, and orbiting around the moderate centre are the radicals or extreme, A bit like the solar system. The moderate political view, is whatever is the prevailing dominant political philosophy accepted by the majority at the time. Nazism in Germany, started out as a extreme political philosophy at its inception, but with power and time, acceptance of that philosophy become the norm, therefore it become the moderate political principle that then applied, and social democrats and others who were once seen as the moderates, had then become the radicals.

runner,
I think most people are smart enough to know that's not true.

The number of people coming here by boat was tiny compared to the number coming by plane. And they were locked up anyway while they were being security screened, so quarantine would not be much of a problem.

Nor have any boat people ever committed terrorist acts against the Australian population. And as for the economy, this lot were even worse at running it than Swan was, and that's saying a lot.

I think your claims are the result of cognitive dissonance - you know Australia's refugee policy is strongly contrary to what Jesus advocated, so you grasp at every straw you can to try to convince yourself that it's really a good thing. But your arguments are increasingly ridiculous - sooner or later you're going to have to face the truth.

BTW everyone pushing against zero emissions are total frauds or ecological vandals or both - but that's even more off topic for this thread!

___________________________________________________________________________________

mhaze,
So why, exactly, do you think Australia will eventually have to eliminate its government debt?
Which generation do you think will be obligated to do so?
By what mechanism do you think "Future generations will pay for current borrowing in lower standards of living than would otherwise be the case"?

'BTW everyone pushing against zero emissions are total frauds or ecological vandals or both - but that's even more off topic for this thread!'

Yeah Aiden like this guy

'The EPA’s highest-paid employee and a leading expert on climate change was sentenced to 32 months in federal prison Wednesday for lying to his bosses and saying he was a CIA spy working in Pakistan so he could avoid doing his real job.'

Must say no one would be surprised.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/climate-change-expert-sentenced-32-months-fraud-says-lying-was-f

Aidan,

* "So why, exactly, do you think Australia will eventually have to eliminate its government debt?"

Did I say that?

* "Which generation do you think will be obligated to do so?"

Oh the task of rectifying the debt position will fall to several generations.

* "By what mechanism do you think "Future generations will pay for current borrowing in lower standards of living than would otherwise be the case"?

Higher inflation, higher interest rates, weaker dollar.

Why do you think we can borrow unlimited sums without some consequences? If such borrowing is consequence-free why not advocate that we borrow enough to give every Aussie $1 million instead of a measly $750?

mhaze,
>Did I say that?
You implied it, both in your utter rejection of my position and in your initial ridiculing. Are you now denying it?

Before we go any further, let's get one thing straight: I NEVER said there would be no consequences. My point is the consequences occur in real time when the debt is incurred. So the higher inflation/interest rates and weaker dollar depend on the deficit, not the debt.

And that wasn't always the case. Forty years ago, borrowing more did have the consequences you've described. But things changed when Paul Keating floated the dollar. Importantly, the government implemented a policy of only borrowing in Australian dollars.

Can you see why that made such a big difference? Borrowing in a foreign currency increases our dollar's present value at the expense of its future value. But borrowing in Australian dollars decreases our dollar's present value. And because it's floating, that decrease is self correcting.

Aidan,

I've never said I think we will repay our full debt. At least not under the current economic paradigm.

" I NEVER said there would be no consequences. "

So what are the consequences?

"...decreases our dollar's present value. And because it's floating, that decrease is self correcting."

Self correcting via a declining (weakening) dollar. Which is inflationary. And which causes higher interest rates.

As I said.....

mhaze,
> Self correcting via a declining (weakening) dollar. Which is inflationary. And which causes higher interest rates.

I don't know what you thought I was referring to, but I was saying the weakening dollar was itself self correcting. Although if you're referring to a weak economy, you're usually right, as the response to that tends to be lower interest rates, which in the short term tend to reduce our dollar's more than increased government spending would.

Anyway, back to my main point:
Yes, government borrowing is inflationary. But the impact is IMMEDIATE. It's not a problem for future generations; the inflationary impact on them depends on how much deficit THEY run, and is entirely unaffected by how much deficit WE run.
Do you understand this now?
Do you still dispute it? if so, on what grounds?

And please keep in mind that the amount the government borrows is only one of several factors affecting inflation. Others include automation (which is highly deflationary) and private sector borrowing. And in the current circumstances, inflation is very low (and so are interest rates); there's a lot the government can spend before inflation becomes a problem.

Hey mhaze,

"Well they're not my first choice of reliable sources, but they are orders of magnitude more reliable than Globalresearch. How anyone could give a site that writes of North Korea as being 'A Land of Human Achievement, Love and Joy' even a second thought is beyond ration understanding."

You didn't even look at the information on Globalresearch.
What you did was google 'globalresearch', then looked at the second listing RationalWiki, and had them decide that the content I was trying to show you wasn't worth looking at.
What you did was go to someone else to make your decision for you rather than taking the time to look at the facts for yourself.
You found a reason to reinforce an existing bias by discounting what I was trying to show outright.
You used another article to draw a conclusion about the info without looking at my info, did you not?
You didn't look at the facts, and consequently you denied yourself a more informed decision based on these facts you dismissed.

The plots thickening.
There's a whole world of info you're dismissing as Communist propaganda, and a lot of it holds merit.

Whilst I accept that it might've come from an accidental release from Chinese BSL-4 Biolab in Wuhan (to which US people from Harvard had some involvement with) it's just as likely based on the info I'm looking at that it came From Fort Detrick.

It certainly didn't originate from the market, if anyone believes that then they're idiots.

This video lays out a timeline.
http://youtu.be/3J6zm6zgah0

ArmChair,

"You didn't even look at the information on Globalresearch."

Well AC, that, like most of your other statements of fact, is rubbish. Of course I read it. But I read it with a sceptical eye rather than someone desperate to believe.

Its rubbish. Its standard conspiracy theory fare where gaps in data are filled in with wild supposition and then accepted as absolute fact.

Its a process that has a long pedigree. eg we don't know how the Egyptians built the pyramids therefore it might have been done by aliens and therefore we've proven aliens visited ancient Egypt.

We don't know exactly why Fort Detrick was closed therefore it could have been because of some virus therefore we've proven that the Wuhan virus started there. That's the level of 'analysis'.

Or the classic - Iranian genomes are similar to Italian genomes therefore we've proven that those dreaded Jews caused both outbreaks. Just a declaration that the genomes are similar without the slightest hint of evidence or thought about how that makes zero historic sense.

AC, we all know that you are virulently anti-US and spectacularly anti-Semitic and if you want to drooling believe this drivel, then knock yourself out. But it really is laughingly idiotic to then label people who prefer to live in the real world as being fools

"AC, we all know that you are virulently anti-US and spectacularly anti-Semitic"

Why wouldn't I be and why wouldn't anyone be?
Why would I support some weird religious authority to that believes Non-Jews are to serve them?
Why would I support some stupid extreme ideology like that?
Why would I support a nation that was founded on terrorism and subjagation?
Why would I support any of that?

I'm not even an anti-semite.
That's how your conditioned mind tries to frame things with endless bs narratives
I'm a don't give a crap-semite, I don't lose 1 minutes sleep.
You know why - It's not hate that motivates me.
I don't give a crap about Semites any more than I don't give a crap about anyone else.

I just don't care to bow down to anyone religious theology.

It's not an ideology I'd support for any inhabitant of the human race.
What you want is for me to show them extra respect above and beyond others and give them an entirely free pass from criticism, and I just don't care for your conditioning.
You're practicing Noahide law whenever you mention 'Anti-Semite'

I don't care about the claims of Anti-Semite
It doesn't mean anything to me.
Do you understand that?
It means nothing its a made up word.

And all the US does is make wars for Israels benefit.
All these refugees everywhere where did they come from?
Wars by the US that support Israels geopolitical interests.
And idiots like you.

Give me one ethical reason why I would support those terror states?
Should I put the list of US regime changes up?
Show me one place the US brought democracy, the people were happy and they left without robbing the nation?

US capitalism is 'I'll kick your teeth in and take all your shite'.
That's not a world vision I support, obviously you do.

I don't hate US citizens or Jewish people, I just won't support stupid ideas, if that makes me an Anti-Semite then I'm an Anti-Semite and Anti-US get over it.
I don't care.

Patient Zero was a US Army Intelligence Officer from INSCOM at Fort Belvoir, Virginia prior to the Wuhan Games.

You're going to have to eat some humble pie this one mhaze.
http://youtu.be/MCEM5dPZP8k

"Patient Zero was a US Army Intelligence Officer from INSCOM at Fort Belvoir, Virginia prior to the Wuhan Games."

Well actually the Chinese government have determined that patient zero "was an elderly man who suffered from Alzheimer's disease."

But I know that in the conspiracy addled world in which you live, any unwanted facts are dismissed as propaganda. This will be so dismissed.

"You're going to have to eat some humble pie this one mhaze."

That you fall for this fact-free rubbish is rather sad.

Fin.

Aidan,

My original point was that " current borrowing [will cause] lower standards of living than would otherwise be the case?"

Its true that the inflationary hit would be ephemeral and would ultimately pass. But in the meantime it would lower standards of living and that lowering will be permanent. No matter what happens thereafter, living-standards will be lower than they otherwise would have been.

Additionally, you seem to want to pretend that the borrowing is a one-off event, the effects of which will pass and be forgotten. But we know its not a one-off event but a constant and growing series of borrowings. So a series of never-ending one-off consequences.

So again, if the consequences are minor and passing as you want to believe, why don't "we borrow enough to give every Aussie $1 million instead of a measly $750?"

mhaze,
>Its true that the inflationary hit would be ephemeral and would ultimately pass.
So you accept that future generations won't have to pay for it?

>But in the meantime it would lower standards of living and that lowering will be permanent.
>No matter what happens thereafter, living-standards will be lower than they otherwise would have been.
Completely, spectacularly and dangerously wrong!

Completely wrong because, at least in the long term, the effects of inflation on living standards are balanced out by the effect of wages. The inflation of decades ago has no effect on the living standards of today. Similarly the living standards of future generations will be determined by the work they do, not the dollar's value.

Spectacularly wrong because the money the government spends doesn't just disappear. Much of it is spent on things that improve our living standards.

Dangerously wrong because you're only considering the effects of too much government borrowing, not those of too little. The latter are worse, resulting in widespread unemployment, which has an enormous adverse effect on living standards. And since in practice most learning is done on the job, unemployment can also result in a long term decline in productivity, hence it can adversely affect living standards for much longer than inflation could.

>we know its not a one-off event but a constant and growing series of borrowings.
>So a series of never-ending one-off consequences.
Growing, yes, because the economy is growing; never ending, yes, because the economy will never end.
A series, yes, but not constant. It fluctuates with the economic cycle.
And that's important because the government should exploit the economic cycle. Countercyclical spending is better value and less inflationary (because there's less completion with the private sector for workers and commodities) and helps the private sector recover when it's weak (by providing more opportunities for it to make money).

>why don't "we borrow enough to give every Aussie $1 million instead of a measly $750?"
Because that would vastly overwhelm the deflationary effect of the private sector, and be highly inflationary; the consequences wouldn't be minor at all.

I hate to tell all those conservative boofheads on this forum who ridiculed me when I started the thread 'The Failing Australian Economy' back in November 2019, I TOLD YOU SO! Four months later in March 2020 with my latest thread sticking it up this trashy conservative government 'We're Back in the Red!' I have to repeat I TOLD YOU SO!

Warning, with the Three Stooges of Economic disaster running the show, ScumO', Friedbrain, and Cornball, I can't see any improvement in the foreseeable future. Wont be long and Australians will be crying out for a good old fashioned Global Financial Crisis, one like in 2008/9 which was handled with some degree of economic nous by the then Rudd Labor government, pink batts and all.

What's the difference economically between the GFC and the Coronavirus Cries, the CC is much bigger and much more difficult to contain than the GFC. The GFC was a Sunday school picnic compared to what the Coronavirus is about to throw at us. The big problem with this government, both on the health front, and on the economic front, to use the latest parlance, not having a clue what to do, the government is very much "BEHIND THE CURVE", health wise about 7 to 10 days behind, economically about 12 months, very dangerous on both fronts, they should be out there anticipating and making decisions in advance. This mob is being totally reactive both heath wise, and on the economic front. With this lack of understanding there is no chance of being in front of the curve with proactive decision making.

Morrison said it all last week with the statement "I'll be going to the football" .... I can think of a few places I would like him to go, but unfortunately we are stuck with Captain Clown and his motley crew steering the ship for the foreseeable future....what a Wally!

pathetic Paul still trying to twist history and make cheap political points. As a believer in the man made gw myth and being part of the Green economic vandals who oppose everything decent and productive you have zero credibility. Next you will be telling us the billions spent on renewables and wrecking our electricity supply is a good thing.

For one who believes in biblical fairy tales runner, you are rather short on credibility yourself. Amazing how without a shred of evidence you will literally believe in nonsense, yet when shown overwhelming scientific evidence about something like climate change, you refuse to believe it. Good for you

still blaming Trump for the Chinese virus Paul or just another one of you idiotic conspiracy theories you Greens spread from hatred.

Nah runner, the covid-19 virus wasn't created by the Chinese, or the Yanks, according to your belief it was CREATED BY YOUR CHRISTIAN GOD. According to you, your God creates all life, including all killer viruses. Can you explain that one? Or will you conveniently side step an answer, like you do about that mysterious church of yours.

Aidan,

Its patently absurd to claim that the standard of living today doesn't affect that of tomorrow. Each generation bequeaths an economy and its living standards to the next who can build on it (or sometimes not... http://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f13844d5b3f14bc28c7513629dd9776f ).

If economic decisions made now cause lower standards of living than would otherwise be the case, those lower standards are passed down the generations. Borrowing today makes borrowing tomorrow both more difficult and more expensive. A weaker currency means imports are more expensive and that isn't a one-time, its a permanent hit. A declining currency makes overseas lenders nervous and demanding higher interest to offset the risk, and that's a permanent hit.

Economic decisions (and errors) made today are passed down. We don't start each new year with a clean slate. Each generation doesn't start with a clean slate. Each new year carries the burdens of the last. Each new generation carries the burden of the last.

It might be possible to argue that the burdens are offset by the benefits IF the borrowing was done create assets that are also passed down the generations. But that would be hard to maintain given where the borrowing is being spent these days.

Certainly could easily argue Paul that giving man free will is a mistake. Especially when you see how evil he has become and then shaking his puny fist towards His Maker and thinking nothing of murdering millions of the most innocent and even celebrating it. On top of that celebrating perversion, immorality, earth worshipping etc etc. Man's heart is certainly wicked.

So you admit lying about the US being responsible for this virus. I suppose when you whole life is based upon a lie then one more can't hurt eh!

You do know that the mercy of the One you hate is available to even the haters. I would much rather be in His hands than god deniers who just dig deeper.

And thanks for acknowledging that he is 'BY YOUR CHRISTIAN GOD'. In actual fact He is the Creator of all and His mercies are available to all. I sincerely hope that even His deniers and haters lay down their pride and receive His mercy.

Sounding rather "sermonistic" there runner.

A basic difference between you and I, is you believe man is basically evil, and needs to be constantly punished in some way for that wickedness. I on the other hand believe mankind is basically good, with a few acceptations. One thing I find interesting about the Christian god, is his change of character over the past few hundred years. Once seen as very much a hateful and vengeful god, somehow the Christian god morphed into what he is today, a loving and forgiving god. Why is that runner, the change in god's personality, why did that come about?

Paul
'A basic difference between you and I, is you believe man is basically evil, and needs to be constantly punished in some way for that wickedness'.

Actually Paul I believe man is corrupted (born into sin). And no I would much prefer mercy to people rather than being punished for their 'wickedness' I am just opposed to wickedness being promoted and celebrated at a State or Federal level. Once celebrated then people are gagged. In our previous much more Christian society people received far less punishment than any Marxist regime dishes out for people not in on the group think. If not for God's mercy we would all of been consumed long ago. Name a church, political organisation, sports organisation, charity that has been free from corruption?

You write

' One thing I find interesting about the Christian god, is his change of character over the past few hundred years.'

God's character has never changed. He is loving, kind, holy, righteous and merciful. Never in history has there been such a loving act as Christs crucifixion to take away the sins of the world (that includes you and me).

Man is cut off from a relationship with God in his fallen state. Man stores up God's wrath by his mockery and wicked acts. In Christ man is restored to a relationship to God and receives mercy. I wish this for all men.