It's on - July 2

Minority government is actually as common as dirt in Australia, it is rare for the governing party to have a majority in both houses of our parliament and we call them mandates when they happen.

Hung parliaments -where the balance of power is held by independents because neither of the two major parties have the numbers to form government - are very, very rare. They're like hen's teeth or lizard feathers and we've had two, one in 1940 and one in 2010.

The latter passed more legislation than any other Australian government, as Bowerbird wrote- not bad for a government of six independents and equal mix of the major parties: amazing what cooperation brings!

And yet, that government has been vilified and portrayed as deeply flawed, incompetent and dysfunctional ever since, especially by our MSM, much of which is owned by that great left wing progressive, Mr Rupert Murdoch

Murdoch and his banker and business mates do it because Conservative government is our norm and Rupert's best buddy, so he helps court the Conservative primary vote by reporting Conservatives walk on water, and warning us of the dangers of the dreaded "Hung Parliament"

We have to vote for something called "stability", apparently: I thought we were voting for a social democracy, so just goes to show you how much I know.

The two major parties denigrate minority governments, too, and their reasons are VERY transparent: their primary vote has been disappearing for years, so they chase the primary vote by maligning minority government. The parties just can't let go of the Party even as their party base abandon them in droves.

The scaremongering about hung parliaments didn't get really loud until the 2013 Election. I think it's because the natives were starting to show serious signs of being over the Surplus Fetish.

 

The recent warning to our AAA rating was because our deficit was getting too high for our capacity to meet it, and they are going to reduce our credit rating if stable government cannot reduce the rate of debt accumulation. This graph nicely shows how under the ALP they debt spirals out of control...in response to your claim was the ALP were the better economic managers.

Much like the stupid 'employment party' idea, where you hand stuff out to people not realizing that it breeds inefficiency and waste and ends up spiralling out of control as we become less effective organizationally and less capable individually. Socialism does not work!!!! You cannot just keep spending....

To answer your question, its apparently net debt. I didn't create the graph but net debt is defined by the IMF as "gross debt minus financial assets corresponding to debt instruments". The link is;

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/fed...e/news-story/aa6d53025c5a7d43b6bc9505b82b66ef

 

AT, you are making up fairy tales again.

Couldn't open your link, because I'm not a subscriber to the Murdoch press.

1. S&P have clearly stated that the major concern is Australia's foreign debt not national debt. However, they are concerned with the government's lack of ability and negotiative ability to change the national debt trajectory.

2. Now onto your graph AT. As you can see, the points in which the debt rose was during world recessionary periods. Take note of this AT: Debt and deficit were clearly changing direction in 95 and 96 after the recession of the early 90's, the point in which Howard took office. We enter a period of unprecedented world economic upturn. However to get the national debt down Howard sold Sh!t loads of national assets and wasted most of the other surpluses on election goodies. His government were by far the most wasteful and highest taxing government Australia has seen. Smoke screened by the world economic upturn. Mr Bean could have managed the economy and looked like an economic manager.

Notice once again that when labor took office in late 2007 it was the period in which the GFC took a grip on world economies, so debt was always going to rise to enable us to survive this period. Look closely now and you'll see Murdoch press obviously moving the red area into coalition government territory. The debt was starting to plateau again from about 2012. Once Libs got in in 2013 the debt trajectory spiked dramatically and hasn't slowed until it reached the 350 billion mark.

Now on foreign/personal debt: Howard oversaw a massive increase in foreign debt, this is the big ship that will be hard to slow until we hit a serious recession(or iceberg ).

The Libs have never been economic managers, people like you were blinded by the smokescreen during the Howard tenure and people like you find it difficult to comprehend. Liberal strategy is if you say it enough it will become entrenched in people's psychy.

We are in for a seriously rough economic period under the coalition if they don't change their economic ideals. Hopefully Turnbull turns the big ship around and turns his back on the economic ideology and thinking of the Howard era.

 

Didnt Costello sell all our gold for $300 an ounce in 2002...not sure of the year...
Why was that necessary...I read somewhere he explained the sale as "we had too much"....yeah right...hows
that working for ya.....

 

And gold end up peaking around $1600 an ounce give or take a little. A huge difference.

 

Either am I, and I can read it fine.

That was the budget emergency everyone was talking about... that the ALP put us on. The LNP have made progress to restore it, but while its easy to spend its harder to rebuild wealth..... so takes time. The S&P warning should be a message to anyone voting ALP to bloody well not do it!

What about the Asian ecomonic crisis? Your memory is partial to the events occuring during the ALP terms because the ALP didn't know how to handle them. When the shoot hits the fan under the LNP we fair better, because they are better economic managers.

You wish, you can clearly see the trajectory was set and continueing under the ALP. It had a pause, but resumed well before the LNP got in. You don't seem to acknowledge, or realize that Australia was not vulnerable to the GFC in the same manner as the Northern Hemisphere, and it did not really impact us much until about 2011. The problem was the ALP did not know how to react to the GFC and so copied what the Northern Hemisphere was doing back in 2008 - which was way to excessive for our situation and is the root of the problem we have now in our economy. The LNP at the time tried to tell the ALP this but they were too busy having committee's and think tanks to try and come up with ideas how to do their job - because they were really clueless about how to do anything, and made a mess of everything they attempted. Waste Waste Waste and pie in the sky promises, matched only by the debt they accumulated. Rudd and Gillard crucified our economy in so many areas.

 

It was the RBA's decision;
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...sale-cost-us-5bn/story-e6frg6nf-1225985231872

 

BUT the sale was approved by the RBA Governor and the Treasurer, Peter Costello.

 

Who is talking about a buddgtry emergency? Wow AT, how about that, just a sheep saying verbatim what Abbott, Hockey and cronies were saying. They're the only ones who were speaking gloom and doom. How about you do your own research instead of going down the superficially lazy line.

Once again: Credit rating agencies are saying it's the "Foreign Debt" not the "National Debt" that's the problem. The coalition want you to believe it's the National Debt. They're just concerned that the liberals don't have the competence to harness expenditure. Abbott and Turnbull refused to negotiate with the senate sensible policy that reached all groups but were simply focussed on own ideals of servicing the elite. Real reason why Turnbull wanted a DD, but it back fired.

The Asian crisis was localised and didn't have substantial effect due to our trading partners but again verbatim you run the coalition line of..."we steered Australia clear". Load of rubbish.

You can clearly see that the trajectory was plateauing around 2012 and 2013. You are just being silly.

Preempting the response to the GFC(Not the Northern Hemisphere Crisis) was proven by every economist in Australia and around the globe as being near perfect in steering us from recession. Went to AAA+ across all CRAs with a stable outlook and acknowledged through the treasures award for Swan. It was a master stroke.

Libs are going to drive us into the ground just like the Fraser era and will require once again a Pabor government in the mould of Whitlam, Hawke and Keatingnot get us back on track.

Wake up Australia and let research do the speaking, not lying and conniving politicians.

 

Your opinion of people who agree with a point of view has no relevance on the accuracy of that point of view... I get how a biased person uses that as the main metric, but it has no bearing on my views.

I was replying to your statement about the ALP being economic managers, and chose to use a graph about national debt. Don't conflate the other point about the credit rating.

But here is your foreign debt, not looking too good for the ALP either, since you bought it up in some vain attempt to discredit me;



Yea your ALP look like fantastic economic managers /sarcasm

LOL, preemptive what? The euro banks awarded Swan the award because he became a nice new customer when he didn't need to and supported the euro banks party line. It was not a treasurer award, it was a best new customer award. We were not exposed in the same way, and we had other instruments (most notably relatively much higher room in our interest rates) to reduce the impact available to us which the Northern Hemisphere did not.... the ALP reaction was knee jerk, incorrect and set us up for a protracted downturn which was unnecessary. Yea the Euro banks love Swan, but not for the reasons you think. So I agree with you, Australia does need to wake up, or at least the few who still vote ALP at least...

 

AT, your graph suggests nothing different from previous graph. It essentially shows the highs and the lows in the international and national economy and again the recessionary periods of both. Not sure if that clicks with ya?? Again, you point out the little Johnny period of tenure, which is a useless measure for how the actual national economy was performing. You need to post international comparisons.
Absolute wasteful period. Where did all money go that was abounding during Howard's period? It wasn't spent on infrastructure or Nation building projects. As a consequence he left a massive structural deficit that required addressing and will certainly take many years to address. He spent like a drunken soldier and fools voted for him based on their short term gains as a consequence of the global economic upturn. Little Johnny did nothing but ride the global wave and the deceived many to somehow think he was responsible for it. Unfortunately AT you are one of the gullible ones who can't make the connection.

On the Swan issue: Gee it must hurt when your world was turned upside down. Gee, the lefties won a global economic award...." it can't be right, I was always led to believe the Libs were the economic champions". " I better come up with a fairytale....surely I can't have been wrong all these years". (I'm hearing you AT, I'm hearing you. "Every economists on the planet including every major economist in Australia must be wrong". (I'm feeling your pain AT) Not!

 

This is an excerpt from this article by the Australian Parliament Office in 2014. We had an LNP Government in 2014. It seems the LNP and the government generally don't share your concerns about foreign public debt.

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliam...y/pubs/rp/rp1415/Quick_Guides/AustForeignDebt

"Is Australia’s foreign debt too large?

While the size of Australia’s foreign debt is large, especially when compared with the Commonwealth’s net debt figure (expected to be $192 billion in 2013–14), it is not often talked about. One reason for this is that it hardly represents anything new. Australia has always been a net recipient of overseas funds because investment opportunities in Australia have always exceeded what can be funded from the domestic savings of its population. This has led to capital inflow that has built up capital, income and wages, but has also increased our net foreign liabilities, most of which are foreign debt rather than foreign equity.
The size of Australia’s foreign debt would be a cause for concern if it was mainly caused by increased consumption rather than increased investment, raising concerns that Australia was living beyond its means. However, Australia’s national saving and national investment levels are both above their long-term average, suggesting Australia is well able to cover the servicing of its debt.
Finally, while Australia has a gross foreign debt that is almost the size of its annual GDP, the more meaningful figure is net foreign debt which is just over half as big, and of this about a quarter is held by the public sector. Since only the portion of foreign debt held by the public sector is liable for repayment by the taxpayer, only this portion has budgetary implications."

 

Why do people fixate on the current account deficit? We're a small population, we import more than we export and that's ok: in real terms, imports are a benefit and exports a cost. They turn up with ships full of lovely goodies and we hand over fiat currency and expend no other effort at all!

Australia has always had high foreign public debt and never even looked like defaulting

 

Sushi, you haven't got it the wrong way around have you? I would have thought exports were a better than imports.

You are right Foreign Debt was never seen as an issue. I can't remember breakdown but aware that our insatiable appetite for property investment is our issue. It tends to stay circulating locally. Maybe reason why government is happy for foreign investment in real estate. Corporate and government investment debt will obviously bring returns. Based on real estate investment debt then my thought is foreign debt may become an issue. That's my thinking anyway.

 

TV bought up foreign debt, because the credit rating was mentioned in one the of the posts. I didn't comment on my 'concerns', but as TV said " Credit rating agencies are saying it's the "Foreign Debt" not the "National Debt" that's the problem.".

 

The delusion is strong in you for sure. Where did all the money go? Go look it up if you have no idea. The Future Fund was one, you know the thing which the ALP emptied in its pathetic time in office... using it like a bank. Your doing a circular argument, and given you cannot keep your points together your just trolling.

Ummm, you might not understand what happened in the GFC and how it effected different countries differently, but the award was decided by a group of European bankers, as I said... because he followed the course of action required by those most effected in the Northern Hemisphere (which was in favor of those same banks) and unnecessarily became one of the best customers to foreign banks. It was an award for Swam allright, but not for being best treasurer, it was for being best new customer. I'm not making stuff up. What do you think he got the award for? Massive waste, Unionising IR so much the arse fell out of manufacturing, or perhaps it was those little cheques he sent out to people.... or maybe the short term construction projects which added nothing of value. The only reason the ALP were in a position to dance like a monkey in ignorance to the sounds from the Northern Hemisphere was because of the how well the Libs had run the joint until Nutter Rudd got the wheel. What kept us going was our interest rates were in a different ballpark, our biggest industries were a long way down the supply chain and the strength of our banks - it was those things which kept us going. It's only now were saddled with the ongoing mess of the ALP's over reaction.

 

You are being lazy and silly AT. Just like all issues you generally comment on, you simply repeat verbatim a newspaper article or a politicians rhetoric. Be an adult AT and start to look a little bit deeper than the superficial readily available and lazy news. It actually sounds extremely dumb AT.

Firstly you show us graphs that demonstrate how incompetent the Libs are economically inadvertantly, and secondly continue clutching at straws with additional shallow statements.
Now which future fund did labor empty AT? This is the first point that would be interesting for you to address......go and do your homework, but just because Tony said it, doesn't mean it's true. In fact you couldn't believe anything he says. Give it to us AT. Either you've got no idea or you are being desperately tricky(Id say both).

How much was invested in super fund from surpluses and how much was invested from sales of public assets? Most of it AT, most of it. All during a global economic upturn that filled to overflowing government coffers. Every nation on the planet had money coming out their proverbials during this period......not just Australia AT, not just Australia. Again, what did the Howard government do with our billions? He was the most profligate government on record and highest taxing by a significant margin. Where did it all go I ask again AT...........And don't bloody make up another fairytale, give us something credible(tongue in cheek)

Still clutching at straws on GFC I see. So we should just believe you and totally disregard virtually every economist on the planet. Needs no further comment.

S&P have concerns about the foreign debt but mostly real estate debt that the banks loan on our behalves. Generally investment debt is not bad debt unless of course the debt remains within national cycle which housing debt does. Government debt and especially our debt given the fact we went through a globally economic tumultuous time. Yeah global AT. You know that interconnecting system of economics starting directly from the largest economy on the globe.

Foreign debt went through the roof under Howard. You know that wealth creating mechanism you spruik about that just rips the guts out each other without external incomings but through foreign ownership of real estate.

 

Kevin Rudd went to the election on it. Not that the media paid too much attention to it, they were too busy in a delusional lefty group think zone Kevin 07 Kevin 07 savouRudd, anything but Howard.... /vomit

You can search yourself, but here is a morsal from wiki;
"In March 2007, the opposition Labor Party announced it would withdraw A$2.7 billion from the Future Fund to finance the National Broadband Network, an initiative to install broadband internet infrastructure across Australia, if it won the 2007 election; this proposal prompted government ministers to proclaim that Labor intended to "raid" the Future Fund for their own means. Labor later indicated that the use of any funds from the Future Fund towards a national high speed broadband network will have to comply and meet all requirements of any commercial investment. This included producing a commercial rate of return on the invested funds, with all profits being returned into the Future Fund allowing further investment."

Sounds like a raid to me.

And they raided the operating budgets of various agencies to try and hide the mess they'd made in the budget.... which is why you cannot hold Abbott to his promises pre that election because the ALP had misled everyone about the state of the budget which those promises were made.

You should really lay off the stupid personal attacks TV, you look like an imbecile doing it as everyone can see your just projecting your own weakness. You seem to be full of shot mate, drawing big empty circles and then laughing at imaginary inabilities of someone to fill them is pretty hick, but if it gives you a laugh keep imagining things and scratching your bells.

 

Read your bloody article AT. "the government proclaimed that a labor government would raid future fund". Who said this and you fell for it without any research.....just demonstrates your superficial and lazy one dimensional approach to politics. You know: (johnny said this and tony said that so that's what I'll base my opinion on ) They were simply running a scare campaign. There are many sections of the future fund. The part of the future fund that labor were tapping into was the building and infrastructure fund. $2.7billion is not a raid, so stop being hysterical AT. The superannuation fund was not touched and was never intended to be touched. What other fairytale have you got that can be easily debunked?

No personal attacks just having fun with superficial one dimensional thinking.

There is enough evidence that dispels the silly myth that the Libs have created for themselves as the proficient economic managers, and the sooner you realise that and others the sooner our country will be run much more efficiently. Of course there are things that labor can do better but they certainly aren't the incompetent economic managers that you have fell for in comparison to the Libs.

Stop listening to the easy news AT and start to do your own research. The economic movers and shakers have been the labor party over the past 40 years. It's there in black and white. Again don't rely on the Howard era as an indication of economic proficiency, it can only be compared against other global economies.

If you still believe that the economic golden global era of the noughties was only isolated to Australia you are simply blissfully ignorant to realities.....you know ( a rusted on liberal voter who will blindly follow them over a cliff if need be).

The graph on my previous post indicates how foreign debt went through the roof under Howard and his dog eat dog approach to wealth creation, which essentially is Australians eating each other from the inside out.