Budget blowout time

Remove this Banner Ad

medusala said:
http://www.budget.gov.au/2014-15/content/fbo/downloads/08_Appendix_B.pdf

Spending when Howard left was 23.3% gdp, now its over 25.5%

Underlying budget cash balance in the budget for 14/15 was 2.4%

Sounds like a spending problem to me.



Quoted for the lulz.
Click to expand...

And tax receipts under Howard were at almost 25% of GDP when Howard had his spending at approximately 23% of GDP.

Not hard for Howard to run Budget Surpluses when his government is listed as 8 of the 10 highest taxing governments, and his average tax to GDP was 23.4% v Hawke/Keating 21.8% and Rudd Gillard 20.8%.
 
Are people having comprehension problems? Just hearing what they want to hear?

I'm am not advocating for the Senate to rubber stamp government legislation, but there are Senators who have been elected through disingenuous preference harvesting who aren't taking their job seriously enough. If it were 36 LNP, 32 ALP & 8 GRN in the Senate I wouldn't be making any comment about how Senators are elected, despite the job perhaps being no easier for the Government.
 
The Punter said:
And as long as they are blocking legislation you don't agree with, then all is well with that house. The argument could easily be made that those checks and balances were being made by Malcolm Fraser and his Senate colleagues in 1975.
Click to expand...
FFS. The Senate obstructed ALP legislation in the first term (as it was entitled to) leading to the double-dissolution in 1974.

The Senate "obstruction" in 1975 (under Mal as OL) was entirely different. First there was the utterly unprincipled appointment of Albie Fields by Joh and secondly the utterly unprincipled (judged by political attitudes since on both sides) blocking of supply. To equate 1975 with the comprehensive failure of the current LNP government to abide by politics 101 (count the numbers and canvas the necessary votes by negotiation) is a category error.

The Punter said:
Personally the fact that one of my Senators was elected with 0.5% of the primary vote harvesting preferences from other micro parties spanning the entire political spectrum is one I find problematic, and easy to fix.
Click to expand...

It is very easy to "fix" by the major parties properly using the current voting system. The LNP and/or the ALP could swap preferences ahead of the minor parties. This would wipe them out. When Steven Fielding was elected on ALP preferences that was just tuff T**ty for the ALP. There is no way Family First would have got in without those preferences had they gone to the LNP.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Windhover said:
FFS. The Senate obstructed ALP legislation in the first term (as it was entitled to) leading to the double-dissolution in 1974.

The Senate "obstruction" in 1975 (under Mal as OL) was entirely different. First there was the utterly unprincipled appointment of Albie Fields by Joh and secondly the utterly unprincipled (judged by political attitudes since on both sides) blocking of supply. To equate 1975 with the comprehensive failure of the current LNP government to abide by politics 101 (count the numbers and canvas the necessary votes by negotiation) is a category error.
Click to expand...

All I said is the argument counter to the one you've just made could be made. But by all means point me to the textbook for your fabled Politics 101. Things could have been done better, but I don't recall reading about Whitlam's extensive negotiating sessions to pass the Budget or secure supply in 1975. He saw it one way and acted accordingly.

Windhover said:
It is very easy to "fix" by the major parties properly using the current voting system. The LNP and/or the ALP could swap preferences ahead of the minor parties. This would wipe them out. When Steven Fielding was elected on ALP preferences that was just tuff T**ty for the ALP. There is no way Family First would have got in without those preferences had they gone to the LNP.
Click to expand...

Very few of those ALP/LNP/GP votes get to the minor parties. They usually stay with those who were voted for. But if you think an accurate reflection of actual preferences of Socialist voters is Shooters and Fishers and Climate Skeptics before Greens then you've got a problem with reality. I don't think you think that - you just like the current system because it sticks it to the man.

Number every box above or below the line and democracy is enhanced.
 
In states where they have OPV at state elections, informality tends to be higher at federal elections because the systems are slightly different, and needlessly so.

We need to have preferences, they just need to be decided by voters and not by preference whisperers.
 
http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/
Australian Debt Clock.com.au is an independent organisation committed to supplying factual economic and financial information to the Australian public. It is the commitment of this website to provide the most accurate and up-to-date information possible.

Quietly ticking in the background, interesting site to drop in and look at the figures occasionally.
 
Maggie5 said:
http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/
Australian Debt Clock.com.au is an independent organisation committed to supplying factual economic and financial information to the Australian public. It is the commitment of this website to provide the most accurate and up-to-date information possible.

Quietly ticking in the background, interesting site to drop in and look at the figures occasionally.
Click to expand...
I wish my bank account clicked over as quickly as some of those money clocks! :(
 
Maggie5 said:
Hopefully not with debt though.
Click to expand...
No debt except for a mortgage that is less than a quarter of the value of our house. We refuse to take out personal loans or buy stuff on interest free.
We were lucky that we bought our first house in 2000 and sold it in 2006 for 130% profit. It was too small for 3 children. I feel sorry for people trying to buy their first home nowadays. In saying that, I do believe a lot of people won't settle for something that is more in line with their price range.
 
Lebbo73 said:
No debt except for a mortgage that is less than a quarter of the value of our house. We refuse to take out personal loans or buy stuff on interest free.
We were lucky that we bought our first house in 2000 and sold it in 2006 for 130% profit. It was too small for 3 children. I feel sorry for people trying to buy their first home nowadays. In saying that, I do believe a lot of people won't settle for something that is more in line with their price range.
Click to expand...

There is no low cost housing option in Australia.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lebbo73 said:
I might be out of touch but at least I operate in the real world. People shouldn't be buying houses they can't afford!
Click to expand...


Thats not in dispute; what is was your comment "I do believe a lot of people won't settle for something that is more in line with their price range".

As if there was a low cost option for them to chose.
 
Fire said:
Thats not in dispute; what is was your comment "I do believe a lot of people won't settle for something that is more in line with their price range".

As if there was a low cost option for them to chose.
Click to expand...
There are always suburbs that are cheaper than others. Some houses are also cheaper than others by quite a margin in the same suburb. People have to realise that they might have to settle for less or rent. It isn't that difficult. What is your real agenda on this issue?
 
What I will say is that Fire may have a point..but..if people are prepared to sacrifice then the cheap options are there. Take Melbourne. Expect an every growing amount of people commuting - not just from Geelong, Ballarat, Bendigo - but smaller places like Lara, Bacchus Marsh, Ballan, Kyneton, Woodend, Gisborne, Macedon, Romsey, Lancefield, Kilmore, Wallan, Broadford, Seymour, Whittlesea, Healesville, Yarra Glen, the Dandenong Ranges, Berwick through to Drouin and beyond Cranbourne.
 
Lebbo73 said:
There are always suburbs that are cheaper than others. Some houses are also cheaper than others by quite a margin in the same suburb. People have to realise that they might have to settle for less or rent. It isn't that difficult. What is your real agenda on this issue?
Click to expand...
Indeed. This talk of melbourne housing crisis really only applies to the nicer suburbs. You can get affordable house and land packages in cranbourne and pakenham. "But I want to live in Fitzroy! " cry some.
 
Gough said:
So having taken a scythe to health, and education funding in it's first two budgets, Scott Morrison now says a GST hike will not be there to fund states funding "black holes". What a disingenuous piece of shit he is.
Click to expand...
Funding for health and education has actually increased. Where do you get your info from Gough? I hope you still aren't referring to the pie in the sky $80b of extra, fairytale funding that Labor proposed several years ago!
 
Lebbo73 said:
Funding for health and education has actually increased. Where do you get your info from Gough? I hope you still aren't referring to the pie in the sky $80b of extra, fairytale funding that Labor proposed several years ago!
Click to expand...
I think you might be wrong there, can you reference a source?
All states seem to be saying the same thing, i.e.funding in real terms has been decreased.
 
Maggie5 said:
I think you might be wrong there, can you reference a source?
All states seem to be saying the same thing, i.e.funding in real terms has been decreased.
Click to expand...
Maggie5 said:
I think you might be wrong there, can you reference a source?
All states seem to be saying the same thing, i.e.funding in real terms has been decreased.
Click to expand...
I will concede that spending on Education is lower in 2015 than it was from 2014's blowout spending. However, Health is higher again from 2014's massively inflated figures. The 2016 estimates for both Education and Health spending is for more increases. Health spending will increase by nearly 10%. This is unsustainable. Especially if a reduction in government revenue is realised.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-...d-diced/5440112#spending/comparison/2013/2014
 
Lebbo73 said:
I will concede that spending on Education is lower in 2015 than it was from 2014's blowout spending. However, Health is higher again from 2014's massively inflated figures. The 2016 estimates for both Education and Health spending is for more increases. Health spending will increase by nearly 10%. This is unsustainable. Especially if a reduction in government revenue is realised.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-...d-diced/5440112#spending/comparison/2013/2014
Click to expand...
Forget about estimates I am referring to actual cuts especially in the area of say the The Alcohol and Other Drugs Council of Australia (2014 budget) and other agencies (mental health), I think I recall a figure of some $400 Million.
I can't recall where I read it but to say that there haven't been cuts and in fact increases, is inaccurate I believe.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-...ace-closure-after-health-funding-cuts/6357164
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Budget blowout time

Similar threads

anchor man
Budget reply
Replies
0
Views
281
anchor man
anchor man
#23 Hill
The Budget
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
3K
NonPhixion
NonPhixion
HurleyHepsHird
It is time to end the consultancy gravy train and rebuild the public service
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Demonic Ascent
Demonic Ascent

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top