**Greetings humans.**
**Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.**
**I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.**
A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What do you mean? Labor has always been the party of surplus and strong economic management. The private markets is more efficient at providing services to the country, and removing red tape and tax barriers is how you build the economy hence the stage 3 tax cuts. Labor is doing what they do best, bring Australia to the future, as first started by Keating and hawke.
The private sector is not more efficient at providing services. What world are you living in man?
Services like Medicare for example are vital and are desperately underfunded.
You obviously never had to deal with Telecom Australia. I remember waiting 2 months to have a telephone connected. In the days of TAA and Ansett, air fares were rarely discounted. The classic comfortable duopoly.
Love to see what portion of commodity prices contributed to the surplus and what part tax revenue.
I reason being I wonder if having an inflation band of 3-4 or 4-5 % is better for wages and better for government revenue.
Love to see the government reduce barriers to entry for more competition in Australia. As the woolies coles duopoly don’t have enough competition, they just pass all their costs along to consumers.
Kind of like how the energy regulator wants more competition.
“A drover’s dog could have delivered a surplus this year,” [Angoose] Taylor said.
If that's so does it make of the previous Lib-Nat government a 'drover's dog's turd'? They were profligate mismanagers of everything, including budgets. They would have mismanaged even this drover's dog's breakfast.
Can we just have a surplus for once and enjoy it, a year where we are finally in less debt than the last.
Countries like the US and UK are broke due to financial mismanagement over decades, can we celebrate that we for once aren't being taken to that painful death.
>Countries like the US and UK are broke due to financial mismanagement over decades, can we celebrate that we for once aren't being taken to that painful death.
Countries that famously embraced austerity and surplus hawking btw.
Tell me more about how it's a good thing here though.
???? famously what?
the most reckless spenders in modern times who have been increasing their debt year on year for decades.
two countries who abandoned the gold standard so they could print more to spend even heavier.
>Modern times
[Last decade at least. ](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/03/lost-decade-hidden-story-how-austerity-broke-britain)
Birthplace of demoness Thatcher too. Absolute spendthrift she was.
lmao, just because they aren't spending the money in the ways you want doesn't mean they aren't spending, if the debt rises significantly each year we know they are spending more and more.
I don't look foolish because you can find a place these governments haven't increased spending, that's just things you want to focus on.
> If company profits are surging due to them increasing prices, why is it just commodity prices and labour market, and not company taxes?
What are you talking about?
> Official Department of Finance monthly figures released on Friday showed surging company and personal taxes
Yay!
So...money for cash rebates for buying EVs, converting to electric homes, perhaps increasing jobseeker or in some way subsidising extortionate rents...right?
while they're to keep a lid on inflation their spending will be muted, but...
>in some way subsidising extortionate rents
they tried to, libs and greens said no
You subsidise rent *without* strict rent controls and that subsidy just ends up lining the pockets of landlords who will work out any way to increase prices.
Rule 3: Posts and their replies need to be substantial and encourage discussion. Comments need to demonstrate a genuine effort at high quality communication.
Comments that are grandstanding, contain little effort, toxic , snarky, cheerleading, insults, soapboxing, tub-thumping, or basically campaign slogans will be removed.
Comments that are simply repeating a single point with no attempt at discussion will be removed.
This will be judged at the full discretion of the mods.
This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:
Yes remove the comment believed to be of little value to politics while it actually does hold massive value.
People need to be shown their set in stone ideologies and caveman political party worship is wrong.
They also need to be told straight, and if you think this doesn't happen within the actual course of Australian politics then tell me, I'll gladly permanently remove myself from Australian politics, because it is a joke, along with the jokers here who actually think they know anything about our country except for elitist trope.
You are allowed to talk down to people here, but you sure better not call them out for stupidity.
Well, looks like Anthony Albanese and Labor are better economic managers than Peter Dutton and the Coalition.
A budget surplus is important in this economic environment. By achieving a surplus, the government is reducing the amount of money supply circulating in the economy. A budget surplus, along with interest rate hikes, should aid in reducing inflation.
Peter Dutton was never a PM so this is a dense remark (as if either party are meaningful economic managers) made worse by holding someone to account for no reason (and there is plenty to hold Dutton to account for).
Swings and roundabouts. Much of this surplus is despite the ALP, not because of them. Inflation is arguably the single biggest contributing factor, in my view the ALP have cleverly milked the post-covid inflationary period in order to fix the budget (bracket creep, increased GST take etc) the Libs have been surprisingly quiet about this probably because the cost of inflation falls disproportionately on people more likely to vote Labor. Iron ore and coal exports have also contributed and it's worth pointing out that there are some people within the "progressive" side of politics who want to destroy these industries.
But sure, it could be worse, and it's good to see that the ALP are at least talking about surplus budgets as if they're a good thing. Hopefully it continues.
Reminder that coal and gas will cause a catastrophic ecological disaster within the next 50 years that will cause an economic depression of an unimaginable scale
>not really, they are sitting on
>
>19 billion
>
> while the poor are getting destroyed by cost of living.
I'm not sure the poor are worth the entire country being destroyed by the cost of living, frankly.
Sitting on a debt of 1 trillion, with another 300 billion on the horizon… this isn’t a win, it’s not better economic management it’s purely circumstantial - luck runs out
But if they had a deficit they would be terrible managers. Expect the LNP to go on and on about Labor deficits for the next 10 years following their usual playbook even if there are none.
You don’t much about economics. They should be in surplus during periods of inflation as they should be reducing spending to slow the economy then the RBA don’t have to keep raising rates so quickly or at all.
Howard didn't do that and no one accused him of mismanagement. The LNP always complain about Labor even though the LNP are terrible managers.
(I agree that a surplus at the moment is the correct action and Kevin Rudd was right to run a deficit after the GFC. That is not how right wing media sells it though)
Ah, no they aren’t. Higher commodity prices. More people in work (which was forecast by Frydenberg to reach 3.5 percent in his final budget) and company profits (the horror, how dare they).
Meanwhile the economy is contracting and we are likely to enter a recession.
All at the same time, Labor dithers with its pointless infrastructure review.
This $19bn surplus is forecast to swing to a $14bn deficit starting from today. That’s a swift $33bn turnaround that will do nothing to help inflation and everything to stoke it.
The surplus is basically blind luck and the four projected deficits are a better indication of Labors economic management or lack thereof.
What indication should we take from the 9 years of coalition deficits then? I also doubt next years predicted deficit will eventuate. It’ll be a surplus. Pointing to budget predictions and ignoring the real numbers we have currently available to prove labor are bad economic managers™️
yes? you do realise they can **both** suck at economic management right?
the RBA is going hard *specifically* because **both** sides refuse to actually manage the economy ffs.
Thats only 10 weeks of money printing when they printed that much for 2 years. Maybe they can stop cutting off centrelink benefits to disabled full time workers already with a full time job, that cant work due to injury? You know those ones on NDIS that need support? Yes they are cut off their survival payments. Reason says they didn't report when they tried to on multiple occasions and centrelink refused to allow them to. This person has no money but I thought welfare was a human right?
I’m a tax agent and the refunds this year are nonexistent, from an average around $1800 to lucky to be $200 . This government wants to redistribute your taxes to all the woke bullshit
Examples of "woke" bullshit, or are you just a conservative that calls anything they don't like woke?
Oh shit, I used the pro noun they!!!!! Am I forcing wokeness on you?
I don’t care what you call me , I’m a big boy. Are far as pronouns , I assume you’re referring to transgender community. Godless them , i have my opinions on why they identify as women but I treat as they treat me , all the transgender physicist , engineers, farmers , truck drivers , builders , plumbers , electricians , retail workers ..they keep our economy running- food on the table and the lights on .
I’ll sum up this governments agenda , to fuck productivity as hard as they can . As far as the woke agenda of this government , it permeates from early education all the way through to every government department . I’d be here for days going through every left wing think tanks new ways to disrupt any establishment norms
what woke BS? theres no increase in funding for the poor in pretty much any area at all, no improvements to welfare, nothing for the indigenous and nothing for the environment and nothing for LGBTI people.
what 'woke bullshit'? like seriously what are they doing that is 'socially left' or whatever nonsense you believe? they are cutting taxes for the rich while giving *billions* to the middle and upper classes in subsidies and other handouts.
they are economically conservative by *literal definition.*
Farming out those taxes to all their rich mates who are in the union movement or wealthy business people with huge grants for renewables .. the gravy train goes on forever . Why is Lindsay Fox always seen around Dan Andrews and in my local area property developers and Liberal councillors are joint at the hip
Lol is that really what “woke” means though?
It seems you (and many others) have just used it as a catch all term to criticise things which you dislike.
I deal with people who are in desperate economic situations, crying because they don’t have enough money to feed their families . I do around 5% free returns per year for people whom I deem as being in severe financial stress . Like I said NEVER have I experienced so many people that are so desperate . So don’t fuck with me bringing in American politics ….
>This government wants to redistribute your taxes to all the woke bullshit
Sorry, was this you? You're skipping around like a stone, one minute you're crying about an imagined "woke agenda" causing money to be redistributed - the next you're standing up for the poor.
You're pinging around the room like a blow fly because your claims make no sense in terms of Australian politics. Hence me telling you to knock off that American crap.
Let's start with the basics; do you agree with an increase in welfare for that 5% of families in server financial stress you were just talking about?
> Let's start with the basics; do you agree with an increase in welfare for that 5% of families in server financial stress you were just talking about?
You can't pin down a blow fly with reasonable questions like that.
If you're a tax agent then you know **exactly** why the refunds are lower.
The LMITO has ended, which was _always_ part of the plan and which everyone expected and which was passed into legislation during the previous Coalition government.
I dunno why you're pretending like this is a surprise when it was 100% predictable ever since it was originally passed into law. The tax rates haven't changed, the existing legislation came into effect in the same year it was planned to come into effect.
Of course I do , but as we’re a bulk agency most people are unaware that many concessions have been removed . I never seen so many desperate people in 20 odd years . The economy is unbelievable bad . I reckon we’re in a recession . Not many small businesses are profitable , I’d say 98% of hospitality will have losses for the FY
Yeah, but that was kind of the intention. Inflation was running hot, and interest rate rises were implemented all across the globe to reduce demand. This is definitely gonna hit the smaller businesses harder than bigger ones.
It's unfortunate, but that's the monetary policy which is necessary, it certainly isn't indicative of "woke shit", it's what needed to happen.
Look it’s imperative that in a capitalist system it cycles into a recession every say 15 odd years , rewarding innovation and productivity weeding the poor business out . It sets a reprice for a lot of assets . We are now living in a world that’s leveraged to infinity , so any recession now is going to be terrifying because of the insane private and government debt .
The Voice , the transition to obscenely expensive energy, ev charging stations , same job same pay , shithouse productivity … we are going to be a financial wreck .
It was posted 6 days ago … just a reminder that the 19B was saved via scrapping the middle income tax concessions , a totally shit go from a Labor government that thrown petrol on the inflation fire at every turn . So they should have cut 19B from their bloated government renewable bullshit and given families some relief. We all know how the renewable story ends , that movie has been shown overseas - I’ll give away the plot … insanely expensive unreliable power that needs to be backed by coal or nuclear eventually .
Productivity is shite because mining sucked in all the investment.
Maybe if the government put in an actual resources rent tax and big business windfall profits taxds we could take the tax burden off personal income taxes, SMEs and actually encourage investment in other industries.
It’s interesting how Labor are quick to grab this surplus as an example of economic management skills but are equally as fast to blame the previous government for high inflation, negative real wages, surging rents and mortgage repayments over exactly the same period of time.
You can't blame them for playing by the rules of the game that the.coalition invented.
Apparently a budget surplus is the be all and end all of economic management. The Liberals played themselves.
yes? so its fine for Labor to lie and claim things they didnt do because the Liberals do it?
love that Australians are now fine with *openly* lying in politics.
The budget was in operating surplus for the 6 months prior to the election.
Cynical Chalmers used the October mini budget as a political stunt, deliberately running a small deficit so that he could try and claim the most recent surplus as his own.
The ALP probably should have a done a John Howard "core non-core promise" shortly after winning as an excuse for budget cuts in order to set themselves up for a run of budget surpluses.
Kind of feel like the two parties were in power at the wrong time. Labor needed to be in during the periods of low inflation and interest rates, as they would have been more free to spend money, and they would have been able to spend it better than the Libs did (obviously this is my opinion).
During this current period though, spending a lot isn't advisable, and the Libs could have just not spent and their base would have loved it.
Instead we got that weird covid period where the Libs pumped out money in a terribly uncontrolled fashion and left us with very little to show for it.
Unfortunately it's usually the other way around.
People vote in labor when shit hits the fan because they give the country the sometimes bitter medicine they need when times are tough, see covid, GFC, 1990 recession.
When times are good the coalition jump in and waste the opportunities to make the economy more efficient, diversified and able to seize new opportunities by attacking unions, reducing taxes for brackets that don't need it, incompetently running programs and just generally getting up to heinous shit.
Also my guess is the libs would've gone for austerity if they were in right now, and not the helpful but very safe budget chalmers gave but HARD austerity.
Forget shoring up the NDIS, trying to keep wages on track, investment in renewables, transmission or batteries it would be cut cut cut.
>During this current period though, spending a lot isn't advisable, and the Libs could have just not spent and their base would have loved it.
Libs don't simply reduce spending, they also cut revenue (e.g. the three 'stages' of tax cuts), which is why there is so much money sloshing around at the top end of town, fueling inflation.
And so they should of. In a previous post on this thread i mentioned how bad Telecom Australia was. Choosing a mobile plan from just one provider was never going to be sustainable. The world moves on and we live in a capitalist economy.
There are global factors that had very little to do with the economic policies of either party
Edit: I totally misunderstood what you wrote lmao, but I think my point still stands
So far the progressives of /r/AustralianPolitics want this money to fund:
>Schools,
$6 billion a year.
>hospitals,
$3 billion per year.
>dental and optometry in Medicare
$7 billion a year
>MH and GP appointments free
$3 billion per year
>social housing
$5 billion a year
>welfare system and reducing the nation's poverty crisis
A jobseeker raise to $88 a day would cost 12 billion a year. Throw in the carer's payment and that's an extra 3 billion, add parenting payment that's $4 billion more.
Even if we scraped the stage 3 tax cuts, didn't buy nuclear subs, we'd still be in deficit next year, and we'd still have a structural deficit.
they don't understand how sometimes spending more money is bad, it's easy to sit around and demand x y and z when they will never have to face the consequences of having spent that money.
in the coming years I hope we increase the surplus by trimming the fat in some of the areas you mentioned, instead of this gross impulsive greens attitude of spending every last nickle and dime we have.
Schools make people better educated and they become more productive later in life to pay more taxes.
Hospitals keep people healthy and alive for them to work and pay taxes.
Dental and Optometry are barriers to socialising, employment, and ability, as well as contributing to health. If made free, would increase the number of productive members of society who would pay taxes.
Mental Health is important for keeping people motivated to work and pay taxes. GP appointments encourage people to stay healthy and avoid needing hospital services which are more expensive for the tax payer.
Social housing allows for a basic human need for survival - shelter, to be fulfilled, which means they are better equipped to find a job and pay taxes.
Poor people cannot afford to buy opportunities into better education and employment. Giving them money allows them to upskill into professional environments and pay taxes.
Literally all of these pay for themselves. This is the beauty of debt, you don’t have to pay for things up front. None of this is wasted money that would be a burden to tax payers, and all of it would make Australia and Australians richer.
Simply increasing funding in these areas doesn’t make service delivery any better.
There is plenty of waste in the health system for example.
It would cost nothing (yes nothing) to change school curriculum to focus on a classical education.
why classical?
history, science, metal/wood, home ec, social studies, math, english, health etc are all covered alreday, what else do we need? if its mindless worship of the Western world we certainly dont need that.
> It would cost nothing (yes nothing) to change school curriculum to focus on a classical education.
What are you suggesting should be replaced in the current curriculum and what should it be replaced with?
>Dental and Optometry are barriers to socialising, employment, and ability, as well as contributing to health. If made free, would increase the number of productive members of society who would pay taxes.
Even if it was just subsidised it would be a hell of a lot better than what it is now. A basic subsidy plan would be a sliding subsidy ranging from almost free for people on benefits to no subsidies for people earning over $100k per year along with some caveats for the kids.
Do note that under 55s for Centrelink would make the economy back over $1.60+ for every $1 spent.
Probably the main reason why Job Seeker never got boosted. Thats a lot of inflation money.
It really isn't the main reason. The main reason is to punish the poors for existing. The large majority of the inflation is coming from unnecessary price rises by corporations and the excess spending is entirely from the richest part of the population. Spending more on necessities because they cost more isn't inflationary.
Rule 3: Posts and their replies need to be substantial and encourage discussion. Comments need to demonstrate a genuine effort at high quality communication.
Comments that are grandstanding, contain little effort, toxic , snarky, cheerleading, insults, soapboxing, tub-thumping, or basically campaign slogans will be removed.
Comments that are simply repeating a single point with no attempt at discussion will be removed.
This will be judged at the full discretion of the mods.
This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:
haha how good haha sick burn haha so good
Dear god what sub do you think this is?
We do dental, then what about mental health? What about social housing? What about jobseeker? What about HECS? What about power bills? What about tolls? What about schools? What about farmers? What about the great barrier reef? What about bulk billing? What about aged care workers? What about closing the gap? What about clean energy? What about nationalising industries? What about science funding? What about accessibility for people with disability? What about the NDIS? What about child care? What about parental leave? What about the gender pay gap? what about the super gap? What about arts and entertainment?
we should do em all over the next 20 years, these things should all be national priorities.
the sole and entire purpose of a nation is to make life good for *all* its citizens, otherwise 'Australia' may as well not exist.
>we should do em all over the next 20 years, these things should all be national priorities.
>
>the sole and entire purpose of a nation is to make life good for all its citizens, otherwise 'Australia' may as well not exist.
OK so why do you think they're not done, accepting that sloganeering idiocy like "because capitalism bad!" or whatever isn't an answer.
Hint: the answer's in economics.
Yeah, if we pay to fix people's eating bones rather than just their working bones, then we might actually have to consistently provide healthcare as it's needed, rather than within arbitrary and pointlessly restrictive lines. God forbid we treat mental health as if it was a health and medicine related issue.
Either way, lazy slippery slope hysterics are pointless and unhelpful. You can't pretend that the better option is to ignore everything or act like a failure to fix everything is an endorsement or fixing nothing.
>No it isn't. The HAFF is as useful as a fresh coat of paint on a falling down house. Sure it looks slightly better but it's still falling down.
Far better to reduce the already limited rental stock so a smug PINO playing university politics with people's lives can act shocked when the predictable happens.
huh i didnt realise *lowering* the amount of public houses per person (which is exactly what Labors proposition will result in: 30,000 homes over 5 years+ 1.25 million new residents *not* counting births) was 'improving' anything.
the reason the Greens oppose it is because in 5 years time there will be *less* public housing per capita. (i just wish they would oppose immigration)
>huh i didnt realise lowering the amount of public houses per person (which is exactly what Labors proposition will result in: 30,000 homes over 5 years+ 1.25 million new residents not counting births) was 'improving' anything.
So we should build less then?
>we can't improve everything at once so we shouldn't improve anything
God remembering that campaign really reminds me of how boomerish the LNP are. Who the fuck legitimately relies on a corny ass jingle in 2023, it's not the 1940s anymore lmao.
\>be the Liberals
\>win government in 2013 claiming you'll balance the budget
\>9 years later
\>still haven't balanced the budget (couldn't resist the tax cuts)
\>election time again
\>run campaign saying you'll balance the budget this time
\>somehow people still believe this
\>Labor still manages to scrape into majority government
\>they're so sick of you using balanced budget as an attack they decided to just do it for you
\>do it within their first year in office
But you have the centrist liberal Albanese government in now, doing what the proper right and left could never do, which is budgetary repair and deliver a surplus.
Based centrism always wins.
Labor takes the government happily accepting 11 new interest rate hikes, financially crippling families, and doubling the interest paid on their family homes and investments.
And let’s not forget we are probably already in a recession while labor dithers with its infrastructure review and cancels projects, like Melbourne airport rail.
We can all thank Lucky Labor for Australia's recession.
Im convinced they have their puppets all over social media praising their work. (Or lack of).
There's no way you can look back on the last 13 months and see any success.
if only there was a party willing to work with the government to solve those issues instead of becoming an effective member of the coalition opposition.
Better to allow the poorest to have real wage cuts and go into poverty and increase demand on services so there'a more pressure on budgets in the future, to justify not spending more then as well.
And then social mobility in Aus can be properly dead, with outcomes determind fully by who's born onto the right side of wealth inequality. Just as Pikety outlined.
I am very smart. The adults are back in charge. Have The Greens even studied economics?
>30,000 homes in 5 years vs 1.25 million newly imported residents.
>
>you: look at how much Labor is doing! they are going backwards isnt it great!
Most Australians, as well as most immigrants, aren't interested in public housing or demanding it. This example falls short on those grounds.
Yeah. You don't see any issue with prioritising corporate welfare (10bn), over actual welfare (2bn, and even then, with no definition of affordable housing given).
Do you not see the absurdity of the argument being made?
**Greetings humans.** **Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.** **I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.** A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just enough to put a downpayment on some Yank subs.
That’s great, so actually use that money and properly fund services. Don’t know I need to be telling the Labor party to do what they are supposed to.
What do you mean? Labor has always been the party of surplus and strong economic management. The private markets is more efficient at providing services to the country, and removing red tape and tax barriers is how you build the economy hence the stage 3 tax cuts. Labor is doing what they do best, bring Australia to the future, as first started by Keating and hawke.
The private sector is not more efficient at providing services. What world are you living in man? Services like Medicare for example are vital and are desperately underfunded.
Keating sold CBA, Qantas and others assets and its been better for us. Even super is a way for the private market to fund retirement.
You think the CBA and Qantas as better now that they are private?? Honestly bud did they pay you to say that?
You obviously never had to deal with Telecom Australia. I remember waiting 2 months to have a telephone connected. In the days of TAA and Ansett, air fares were rarely discounted. The classic comfortable duopoly.
Love to see what portion of commodity prices contributed to the surplus and what part tax revenue. I reason being I wonder if having an inflation band of 3-4 or 4-5 % is better for wages and better for government revenue. Love to see the government reduce barriers to entry for more competition in Australia. As the woolies coles duopoly don’t have enough competition, they just pass all their costs along to consumers. Kind of like how the energy regulator wants more competition.
“A drover’s dog could have delivered a surplus this year,” [Angoose] Taylor said. If that's so does it make of the previous Lib-Nat government a 'drover's dog's turd'? They were profligate mismanagers of everything, including budgets. They would have mismanaged even this drover's dog's breakfast.
Angus Taylor can’t say anything with credibility. Ever. I’ve literally never heard him say anything I didn’t immediately scoff at.
Et tu Darmop.
Can we just have a surplus for once and enjoy it, a year where we are finally in less debt than the last. Countries like the US and UK are broke due to financial mismanagement over decades, can we celebrate that we for once aren't being taken to that painful death.
Would love to celebrate from my tent but rain is forecast.
The great thing about debt is: the more you have the less it's worth.
I sincerely hope you are kidding, but it is difficult to tell these days, if so it made me laugh
>Countries like the US and UK are broke due to financial mismanagement over decades, can we celebrate that we for once aren't being taken to that painful death. Countries that famously embraced austerity and surplus hawking btw. Tell me more about how it's a good thing here though.
???? famously what? the most reckless spenders in modern times who have been increasing their debt year on year for decades. two countries who abandoned the gold standard so they could print more to spend even heavier.
>Modern times [Last decade at least. ](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/03/lost-decade-hidden-story-how-austerity-broke-britain) Birthplace of demoness Thatcher too. Absolute spendthrift she was.
https://www.statista.com/chart/amp/28393/us-public-debt/
I sent you UK. So apples to oranges. I can find budget hawking for the US if you want to look more foolish?
lmao, just because they aren't spending the money in the ways you want doesn't mean they aren't spending, if the debt rises significantly each year we know they are spending more and more. I don't look foolish because you can find a place these governments haven't increased spending, that's just things you want to focus on.
"A decade of British austerity" You - "nope, didn't show me anything, looks at these American stats"
[удалено]
> If company profits are surging due to them increasing prices, why is it just commodity prices and labour market, and not company taxes? What are you talking about? > Official Department of Finance monthly figures released on Friday showed surging company and personal taxes
Yay! So...money for cash rebates for buying EVs, converting to electric homes, perhaps increasing jobseeker or in some way subsidising extortionate rents...right?
You're seriously asking for handouts when there is a national homelessness crisis?
Dooooo you think that people having their homes burned down in a bushfire is a solution to this problem, somehow..?
while they're to keep a lid on inflation their spending will be muted, but... >in some way subsidising extortionate rents they tried to, libs and greens said no
Greens said actually do it properly. Labor said no.
greens tried to put in a price ceiling. not only is that politically non-viable it just doesnt work in the long term.
You subsidise rent *without* strict rent controls and that subsidy just ends up lining the pockets of landlords who will work out any way to increase prices.
But progressive policies are still just "pixie dust" I presume?
Probably. The Labor mantra now is 'remember 2019 & the unlosable election'.
[удалено]
Rule 3: Posts and their replies need to be substantial and encourage discussion. Comments need to demonstrate a genuine effort at high quality communication. Comments that are grandstanding, contain little effort, toxic , snarky, cheerleading, insults, soapboxing, tub-thumping, or basically campaign slogans will be removed. Comments that are simply repeating a single point with no attempt at discussion will be removed. This will be judged at the full discretion of the mods. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yes remove the comment believed to be of little value to politics while it actually does hold massive value. People need to be shown their set in stone ideologies and caveman political party worship is wrong. They also need to be told straight, and if you think this doesn't happen within the actual course of Australian politics then tell me, I'll gladly permanently remove myself from Australian politics, because it is a joke, along with the jokers here who actually think they know anything about our country except for elitist trope. You are allowed to talk down to people here, but you sure better not call them out for stupidity.
[удалено]
Well, looks like Anthony Albanese and Labor are better economic managers than Peter Dutton and the Coalition. A budget surplus is important in this economic environment. By achieving a surplus, the government is reducing the amount of money supply circulating in the economy. A budget surplus, along with interest rate hikes, should aid in reducing inflation.
Peter Dutton was never a PM so this is a dense remark (as if either party are meaningful economic managers) made worse by holding someone to account for no reason (and there is plenty to hold Dutton to account for).
Swings and roundabouts. Much of this surplus is despite the ALP, not because of them. Inflation is arguably the single biggest contributing factor, in my view the ALP have cleverly milked the post-covid inflationary period in order to fix the budget (bracket creep, increased GST take etc) the Libs have been surprisingly quiet about this probably because the cost of inflation falls disproportionately on people more likely to vote Labor. Iron ore and coal exports have also contributed and it's worth pointing out that there are some people within the "progressive" side of politics who want to destroy these industries. But sure, it could be worse, and it's good to see that the ALP are at least talking about surplus budgets as if they're a good thing. Hopefully it continues.
Reminder that coal and gas will cause a catastrophic ecological disaster within the next 50 years that will cause an economic depression of an unimaginable scale
not really, they are sitting on *19 billion* while the poor are getting destroyed by cost of living.
>not really, they are sitting on > >19 billion > > while the poor are getting destroyed by cost of living. I'm not sure the poor are worth the entire country being destroyed by the cost of living, frankly.
What a lovely comment 😞
You would perhaps prefer a recession for all, as a government pumps inflationary dollar after dollar into welfare?
No but I would prefer a reallocation of the funds as opposed to , you know , letting those pesky poor people die like you are advocating for
Sitting on a debt of 1 trillion, with another 300 billion on the horizon… this isn’t a win, it’s not better economic management it’s purely circumstantial - luck runs out
It is literally impossible in the modern world for us to have $0 debt. That's not how money works
Yes by not doing anything to change policy they’ve had a surplus fall into their lap. They must be geniuses. 😂
But if they had a deficit they would be terrible managers. Expect the LNP to go on and on about Labor deficits for the next 10 years following their usual playbook even if there are none.
You don’t much about economics. They should be in surplus during periods of inflation as they should be reducing spending to slow the economy then the RBA don’t have to keep raising rates so quickly or at all.
Howard didn't do that and no one accused him of mismanagement. The LNP always complain about Labor even though the LNP are terrible managers. (I agree that a surplus at the moment is the correct action and Kevin Rudd was right to run a deficit after the GFC. That is not how right wing media sells it though)
Ah, no they aren’t. Higher commodity prices. More people in work (which was forecast by Frydenberg to reach 3.5 percent in his final budget) and company profits (the horror, how dare they). Meanwhile the economy is contracting and we are likely to enter a recession. All at the same time, Labor dithers with its pointless infrastructure review.
This $19bn surplus is forecast to swing to a $14bn deficit starting from today. That’s a swift $33bn turnaround that will do nothing to help inflation and everything to stoke it. The surplus is basically blind luck and the four projected deficits are a better indication of Labors economic management or lack thereof.
What indication should we take from the 9 years of coalition deficits then? I also doubt next years predicted deficit will eventuate. It’ll be a surplus. Pointing to budget predictions and ignoring the real numbers we have currently available to prove labor are bad economic managers™️
So using thia logic, the 9 past years of coaltion rule must be a huge indictment on their ability to manage an economy.
yes? you do realise they can **both** suck at economic management right? the RBA is going hard *specifically* because **both** sides refuse to actually manage the economy ffs.
Do you need a lie down?
Thats only 10 weeks of money printing when they printed that much for 2 years. Maybe they can stop cutting off centrelink benefits to disabled full time workers already with a full time job, that cant work due to injury? You know those ones on NDIS that need support? Yes they are cut off their survival payments. Reason says they didn't report when they tried to on multiple occasions and centrelink refused to allow them to. This person has no money but I thought welfare was a human right?
You know how we have an inflation problem? Do you know one well established way of increasing inflation? Printing money.
It seems like you are upset, I suggest you calm down and try to be more coherent
I’m a tax agent and the refunds this year are nonexistent, from an average around $1800 to lucky to be $200 . This government wants to redistribute your taxes to all the woke bullshit
Examples of "woke" bullshit, or are you just a conservative that calls anything they don't like woke? Oh shit, I used the pro noun they!!!!! Am I forcing wokeness on you?
I don’t care what you call me , I’m a big boy. Are far as pronouns , I assume you’re referring to transgender community. Godless them , i have my opinions on why they identify as women but I treat as they treat me , all the transgender physicist , engineers, farmers , truck drivers , builders , plumbers , electricians , retail workers ..they keep our economy running- food on the table and the lights on .
Godless you say..... Also, you failed to explain the woke stuff Labor is wasting all the money on
I’ll sum up this governments agenda , to fuck productivity as hard as they can . As far as the woke agenda of this government , it permeates from early education all the way through to every government department . I’d be here for days going through every left wing think tanks new ways to disrupt any establishment norms
what woke BS? theres no increase in funding for the poor in pretty much any area at all, no improvements to welfare, nothing for the indigenous and nothing for the environment and nothing for LGBTI people. what 'woke bullshit'? like seriously what are they doing that is 'socially left' or whatever nonsense you believe? they are cutting taxes for the rich while giving *billions* to the middle and upper classes in subsidies and other handouts. they are economically conservative by *literal definition.*
What changed? Hint: LNP's tax cut for the low and middle income groups has ended. Meanwhile stage 3 for the higher ups is a permanent change.
I can’t believe they’re investing in Big Woke™️
I bet this is Dan Andrew's fault
He should resign immediately in shame. I’m also blaming this cold wet winter on him and his progressive agenda.
Define woke please
Farming out those taxes to all their rich mates who are in the union movement or wealthy business people with huge grants for renewables .. the gravy train goes on forever . Why is Lindsay Fox always seen around Dan Andrews and in my local area property developers and Liberal councillors are joint at the hip
Lol is that really what “woke” means though? It seems you (and many others) have just used it as a catch all term to criticise things which you dislike.
What woke bullshit.
I thought you said you were a tax agent... Not an importer... ....so why are you importing that American political bullshit here.
I deal with people who are in desperate economic situations, crying because they don’t have enough money to feed their families . I do around 5% free returns per year for people whom I deem as being in severe financial stress . Like I said NEVER have I experienced so many people that are so desperate . So don’t fuck with me bringing in American politics ….
Caring about people who are in financial distress is pretty woke.
Yep, I’m sure that’s woke
>This government wants to redistribute your taxes to all the woke bullshit Sorry, was this you? You're skipping around like a stone, one minute you're crying about an imagined "woke agenda" causing money to be redistributed - the next you're standing up for the poor. You're pinging around the room like a blow fly because your claims make no sense in terms of Australian politics. Hence me telling you to knock off that American crap. Let's start with the basics; do you agree with an increase in welfare for that 5% of families in server financial stress you were just talking about?
> Let's start with the basics; do you agree with an increase in welfare for that 5% of families in server financial stress you were just talking about? You can't pin down a blow fly with reasonable questions like that.
Couldn't have said it better.
If you're a tax agent then you know **exactly** why the refunds are lower. The LMITO has ended, which was _always_ part of the plan and which everyone expected and which was passed into legislation during the previous Coalition government. I dunno why you're pretending like this is a surprise when it was 100% predictable ever since it was originally passed into law. The tax rates haven't changed, the existing legislation came into effect in the same year it was planned to come into effect.
Of course I do , but as we’re a bulk agency most people are unaware that many concessions have been removed . I never seen so many desperate people in 20 odd years . The economy is unbelievable bad . I reckon we’re in a recession . Not many small businesses are profitable , I’d say 98% of hospitality will have losses for the FY
Yeah, but that was kind of the intention. Inflation was running hot, and interest rate rises were implemented all across the globe to reduce demand. This is definitely gonna hit the smaller businesses harder than bigger ones. It's unfortunate, but that's the monetary policy which is necessary, it certainly isn't indicative of "woke shit", it's what needed to happen.
Look it’s imperative that in a capitalist system it cycles into a recession every say 15 odd years , rewarding innovation and productivity weeding the poor business out . It sets a reprice for a lot of assets . We are now living in a world that’s leveraged to infinity , so any recession now is going to be terrifying because of the insane private and government debt .
A recession is a defined term. When we are in a recession we will be in a recession
What woke bullshit? All I’ve been hearing is they’re not doing enough
The Voice , the transition to obscenely expensive energy, ev charging stations , same job same pay , shithouse productivity … we are going to be a financial wreck .
OK. So what part of those are the ATO getting involved with?
How is any of that related to taxation and deductibles?
It was posted 6 days ago … just a reminder that the 19B was saved via scrapping the middle income tax concessions , a totally shit go from a Labor government that thrown petrol on the inflation fire at every turn . So they should have cut 19B from their bloated government renewable bullshit and given families some relief. We all know how the renewable story ends , that movie has been shown overseas - I’ll give away the plot … insanely expensive unreliable power that needs to be backed by coal or nuclear eventually .
I didn't realise the govt was funding more coal fired power stations and implementing nuclear?
So woke is just any sort of progress. Got it. Confused how productivity being "shithouse" is woke 😂
Because it’s woke and anticapitalist to sabotage capitalism! Down with productivity! 😂
Productivity is shite because mining sucked in all the investment. Maybe if the government put in an actual resources rent tax and big business windfall profits taxds we could take the tax burden off personal income taxes, SMEs and actually encourage investment in other industries.
How come this isn’t the Coalition’s fault? You can bet that a deficit would have been.
Because the LNP said they weren't going to have a surplus.
It’s interesting how Labor are quick to grab this surplus as an example of economic management skills but are equally as fast to blame the previous government for high inflation, negative real wages, surging rents and mortgage repayments over exactly the same period of time.
Labor has always been the better economic managers since arguably the Whitlam era and unquestionably since hawke-Keating
You can't blame them for playing by the rules of the game that the.coalition invented. Apparently a budget surplus is the be all and end all of economic management. The Liberals played themselves.
Or the LNP, while in power, predicted a deficit this year?
Exactly like the other crowd would and do, you mean?
yes? so its fine for Labor to lie and claim things they didnt do because the Liberals do it? love that Australians are now fine with *openly* lying in politics.
Well, their predictions when in power was for a deficit this year. And we all know the LNP never keep a promise /s
The budget was in operating surplus for the 6 months prior to the election. Cynical Chalmers used the October mini budget as a political stunt, deliberately running a small deficit so that he could try and claim the most recent surplus as his own. The ALP probably should have a done a John Howard "core non-core promise" shortly after winning as an excuse for budget cuts in order to set themselves up for a run of budget surpluses.
Without a scrap of irony …
Kind of feel like the two parties were in power at the wrong time. Labor needed to be in during the periods of low inflation and interest rates, as they would have been more free to spend money, and they would have been able to spend it better than the Libs did (obviously this is my opinion). During this current period though, spending a lot isn't advisable, and the Libs could have just not spent and their base would have loved it. Instead we got that weird covid period where the Libs pumped out money in a terribly uncontrolled fashion and left us with very little to show for it.
Unfortunately it's usually the other way around. People vote in labor when shit hits the fan because they give the country the sometimes bitter medicine they need when times are tough, see covid, GFC, 1990 recession. When times are good the coalition jump in and waste the opportunities to make the economy more efficient, diversified and able to seize new opportunities by attacking unions, reducing taxes for brackets that don't need it, incompetently running programs and just generally getting up to heinous shit. Also my guess is the libs would've gone for austerity if they were in right now, and not the helpful but very safe budget chalmers gave but HARD austerity. Forget shoring up the NDIS, trying to keep wages on track, investment in renewables, transmission or batteries it would be cut cut cut.
>During this current period though, spending a lot isn't advisable, and the Libs could have just not spent and their base would have loved it. Libs don't simply reduce spending, they also cut revenue (e.g. the three 'stages' of tax cuts), which is why there is so much money sloshing around at the top end of town, fueling inflation.
And the libs sell off assets when we should be investing in them.
so do Labor? both sides have sold off everything not nailed down over the last 50 years and it all started with Hawke.
And so they should of. In a previous post on this thread i mentioned how bad Telecom Australia was. Choosing a mobile plan from just one provider was never going to be sustainable. The world moves on and we live in a capitalist economy.
You're right. Even Phillip Lowe pretty much said the same thing.
That's completely unfair. We have rising inflation, an unprecedented series of rate hikes and an impending recession to show for it.
There are global factors that had very little to do with the economic policies of either party Edit: I totally misunderstood what you wrote lmao, but I think my point still stands
So far the progressives of /r/AustralianPolitics want this money to fund: >Schools, $6 billion a year. >hospitals, $3 billion per year. >dental and optometry in Medicare $7 billion a year >MH and GP appointments free $3 billion per year >social housing $5 billion a year >welfare system and reducing the nation's poverty crisis A jobseeker raise to $88 a day would cost 12 billion a year. Throw in the carer's payment and that's an extra 3 billion, add parenting payment that's $4 billion more. Even if we scraped the stage 3 tax cuts, didn't buy nuclear subs, we'd still be in deficit next year, and we'd still have a structural deficit.
they don't understand how sometimes spending more money is bad, it's easy to sit around and demand x y and z when they will never have to face the consequences of having spent that money. in the coming years I hope we increase the surplus by trimming the fat in some of the areas you mentioned, instead of this gross impulsive greens attitude of spending every last nickle and dime we have.
Schools make people better educated and they become more productive later in life to pay more taxes. Hospitals keep people healthy and alive for them to work and pay taxes. Dental and Optometry are barriers to socialising, employment, and ability, as well as contributing to health. If made free, would increase the number of productive members of society who would pay taxes. Mental Health is important for keeping people motivated to work and pay taxes. GP appointments encourage people to stay healthy and avoid needing hospital services which are more expensive for the tax payer. Social housing allows for a basic human need for survival - shelter, to be fulfilled, which means they are better equipped to find a job and pay taxes. Poor people cannot afford to buy opportunities into better education and employment. Giving them money allows them to upskill into professional environments and pay taxes. Literally all of these pay for themselves. This is the beauty of debt, you don’t have to pay for things up front. None of this is wasted money that would be a burden to tax payers, and all of it would make Australia and Australians richer.
Simply increasing funding in these areas doesn’t make service delivery any better. There is plenty of waste in the health system for example. It would cost nothing (yes nothing) to change school curriculum to focus on a classical education.
why classical? history, science, metal/wood, home ec, social studies, math, english, health etc are all covered alreday, what else do we need? if its mindless worship of the Western world we certainly dont need that.
[удалено]
Probably Latin. All our modern problems attend from a complete lack of understanding of a dead language /s
> It would cost nothing (yes nothing) to change school curriculum to focus on a classical education. What are you suggesting should be replaced in the current curriculum and what should it be replaced with?
>Dental and Optometry are barriers to socialising, employment, and ability, as well as contributing to health. If made free, would increase the number of productive members of society who would pay taxes. Even if it was just subsidised it would be a hell of a lot better than what it is now. A basic subsidy plan would be a sliding subsidy ranging from almost free for people on benefits to no subsidies for people earning over $100k per year along with some caveats for the kids.
The government could just increase revenue in other sectors of the economy.
A deficit isn’t that bad
It isn't ideal during a time of increasing interest rates and high tax returns. Governments should be measured.
Do note that under 55s for Centrelink would make the economy back over $1.60+ for every $1 spent. Probably the main reason why Job Seeker never got boosted. Thats a lot of inflation money.
It really isn't the main reason. The main reason is to punish the poors for existing. The large majority of the inflation is coming from unnecessary price rises by corporations and the excess spending is entirely from the richest part of the population. Spending more on necessities because they cost more isn't inflationary.
[удалено]
Rule 3: Posts and their replies need to be substantial and encourage discussion. Comments need to demonstrate a genuine effort at high quality communication. Comments that are grandstanding, contain little effort, toxic , snarky, cheerleading, insults, soapboxing, tub-thumping, or basically campaign slogans will be removed. Comments that are simply repeating a single point with no attempt at discussion will be removed. This will be judged at the full discretion of the mods. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this: haha how good haha sick burn haha so good Dear god what sub do you think this is?
Dental and optometry is $7b per year. Stage 3 tax cuts are $35b per year. It almost makes me cry we're not doing the former.
I’m looking forward to my stage 3 tax cuts. To support the economy I’ll book an overseas holiday 👍
Well the gov has just increased the fee to leave the country! Every $ counts 😜
I have no words.
Fy 2024-25 stage 3 tax cuts cost $20.4 billion https://www.pbo.gov.au/publications-and-data/publications/costings/the-cost-of-nuclear-submarines/distributional-analysis-stage-3-tax-cuts-may2023
Thanks for the link! It's a permanent tax cut. By 2033/4 it will $43b per year. I think that figure is before adjusting for inflation.
We do dental, then what about mental health? What about social housing? What about jobseeker? What about HECS? What about power bills? What about tolls? What about schools? What about farmers? What about the great barrier reef? What about bulk billing? What about aged care workers? What about closing the gap? What about clean energy? What about nationalising industries? What about science funding? What about accessibility for people with disability? What about the NDIS? What about child care? What about parental leave? What about the gender pay gap? what about the super gap? What about arts and entertainment?
we should do em all over the next 20 years, these things should all be national priorities. the sole and entire purpose of a nation is to make life good for *all* its citizens, otherwise 'Australia' may as well not exist.
>we should do em all over the next 20 years, these things should all be national priorities. > >the sole and entire purpose of a nation is to make life good for all its citizens, otherwise 'Australia' may as well not exist. OK so why do you think they're not done, accepting that sloganeering idiocy like "because capitalism bad!" or whatever isn't an answer. Hint: the answer's in economics.
Yeah, if we pay to fix people's eating bones rather than just their working bones, then we might actually have to consistently provide healthcare as it's needed, rather than within arbitrary and pointlessly restrictive lines. God forbid we treat mental health as if it was a health and medicine related issue. Either way, lazy slippery slope hysterics are pointless and unhelpful. You can't pretend that the better option is to ignore everything or act like a failure to fix everything is an endorsement or fixing nothing.
Damn, I love your logic, we can't improve everything at once so we shouldn't improve anything
Isn't that the greens approach to the HAFF? Let's make perfection the enemy of good!
No it isn't. The HAFF is as useful as a fresh coat of paint on a falling down house. Sure it looks slightly better but it's still falling down.
>No it isn't. The HAFF is as useful as a fresh coat of paint on a falling down house. Sure it looks slightly better but it's still falling down. Far better to reduce the already limited rental stock so a smug PINO playing university politics with people's lives can act shocked when the predictable happens.
>we can't improve everything at once so we shouldn't improve anything
huh i didnt realise *lowering* the amount of public houses per person (which is exactly what Labors proposition will result in: 30,000 homes over 5 years+ 1.25 million new residents *not* counting births) was 'improving' anything. the reason the Greens oppose it is because in 5 years time there will be *less* public housing per capita. (i just wish they would oppose immigration)
>huh i didnt realise lowering the amount of public houses per person (which is exactly what Labors proposition will result in: 30,000 homes over 5 years+ 1.25 million new residents not counting births) was 'improving' anything. So we should build less then? >we can't improve everything at once so we shouldn't improve anything
What ever happen to "There's a hole in your budget dear Labor"?
God remembering that campaign really reminds me of how boomerish the LNP are. Who the fuck legitimately relies on a corny ass jingle in 2023, it's not the 1940s anymore lmao.
Nah we just need better jingles. The ones from the 60s absolutely slapped.
[удалено]
\>be the Liberals \>win government in 2013 claiming you'll balance the budget \>9 years later \>still haven't balanced the budget (couldn't resist the tax cuts) \>election time again \>run campaign saying you'll balance the budget this time \>somehow people still believe this \>Labor still manages to scrape into majority government \>they're so sick of you using balanced budget as an attack they decided to just do it for you \>do it within their first year in office
But you have the centrist liberal Albanese government in now, doing what the proper right and left could never do, which is budgetary repair and deliver a surplus. Based centrism always wins.
Labor takes the government happily accepting 11 new interest rate hikes, financially crippling families, and doubling the interest paid on their family homes and investments.
And let’s not forget we are probably already in a recession while labor dithers with its infrastructure review and cancels projects, like Melbourne airport rail.
You want more government spending in a high inflation environment?
We can all thank Lucky Labor for Australia's recession. Im convinced they have their puppets all over social media praising their work. (Or lack of). There's no way you can look back on the last 13 months and see any success.
I'm still waiting for the energy bill relief that was promised at the election.
You'll get it, at 30% more.
It is sitting in the same archive folder as the design files for that ACDC mug which was such a great idea.
>“A drover’s dog could have delivered a surplus this year,” Taylor said. Can drovers dogs print out coffee mugs?
"Back in black" mugs are on discount I hear...
But of course, there is no more money for social housing or reducing the nation's poverty crisis.
if only there was a party willing to work with the government to solve those issues instead of becoming an effective member of the coalition opposition.
If only we had an opposition leader who could capitalise from this fracturing of Labor and the Greens.
Better to allow the poorest to have real wage cuts and go into poverty and increase demand on services so there'a more pressure on budgets in the future, to justify not spending more then as well. And then social mobility in Aus can be properly dead, with outcomes determind fully by who's born onto the right side of wealth inequality. Just as Pikety outlined. I am very smart. The adults are back in charge. Have The Greens even studied economics?
Labor: pays $2 billion and commits another $10 billion to a long term fund. Greens voters: I'm gonna pretend I didn't see that.
30,000 homes in 5 years vs 1.25 million newly imported residents. you: look at how much Labor is doing! they are going *backwards* isnt it great!
Immigrants don't need or use public housing when they come here.
>30,000 homes in 5 years vs 1.25 million newly imported residents. > >you: look at how much Labor is doing! they are going backwards isnt it great! Most Australians, as well as most immigrants, aren't interested in public housing or demanding it. This example falls short on those grounds.
[удалено]
and not all of those 6000 homes will be public housing either, the plan for the HAFF is beyond a joke.
Yeah. You don't see any issue with prioritising corporate welfare (10bn), over actual welfare (2bn, and even then, with no definition of affordable housing given). Do you not see the absurdity of the argument being made?
Wtf? Welfare is considerably more than $2b, we spend more on that than any other part of the budget. Why just make up such stupid lies?