What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

OT: Current Affairs and Politics

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
41,836
I haven't a lot of idea how to run an economy. But I feel like most people running the country would have some idea even though we all call the stupid and clueless. And if anyone on here was trying to do their job and making decision I am sure many would go pear shaped also. If it was all that simple my guess is they would make the changes.

I don't think our government is out to get us at all. We are competing globally and they are trying to do best for us both short and long term.

As far as a surplus goes I have no idea. But I've heard my accountant say multiple times having a strong surplus makes planning for future a lot easier and gives more options on the board.

Anyhows pur lives are better then most around the world so I am reasonably happy how things are at the moment.

Some seem to have no f**king idea, and that isn't surprising when you think about it. Doing what ever they did before politics isn't always gonna prepare you to run an economy.

The big issue is always the politics, I mean there is some dumb as f**k shit presented to us as arguments, because they figure it washes . And it does wash because most people don't really care enough about it to take the time to be actually informed about how this shit is supposed to work.
 

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
41,836
In regards to the state government projects, I have a personal viewpoint on this.

Shovel ready (as Bandy pointed out)? Yes? Good.
Funded in your forward estimates? Yes? Good.

Then, the federal government covers the cost to start work now (rather than whenever scheduled in the forward estimates) but the state government then has to forego the equivalent amount of GST revenue when the work was actually scheduled in their budget.

This way, we don't blow our federal surplus (Shut up! I like a surplus!!!) but the projects get moved forward and starts providing benefits, now.

Oh, I mentioned the GST...there's another can of worms that needs fixing...

Why do you like a surplus?

I mean the literal definition of a surplus is that the government taxes more money than it spends. Which means that in any given year it takes more money from taxpayers than it actually needs.

How is this a good thing?
 

Gary Gutful

Post Whore
Messages
51,727
Its the Liberal way, they are obsessed with surplus
I seem to recall Rudd, Swan, Gillard and Bowen promising a surplus on more than one occasion. They could be accused of being obsessed as well given the number of times it came up during that period.
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
84,176
Why do you like a surplus?

I mean the literal definition of a surplus is that the government taxes more money than it spends. Which means that in any given year it takes more money from taxpayers than it actually needs.

How is this a good thing?
I assume he means having more cash than debt.
 

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
41,836
I seem to recall Rudd, Swan, Gillard and Bowen promising a surplus on more than one occasion. They could be accused of being obsessed as well given the number of times it came up during that period.

This is because they were too f**kin' weak to offer a counter to the narrative.

Keating managed to sell " the recession we had to have ". Because he wasn't an economic pissant.
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
150,753
I seem to recall Rudd, Swan, Gillard and Bowen promising a surplus on more than one occasion. They could be accused of being obsessed as well given the number of times it came up during that period.

I wouldn't say they were obsessed, they just wanted to be one of the cool guys too
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
84,176
That's not a surplus.
Maybe not but the fact is not all debt fuels investment. Often it's just about buying votes, and the main beneficiaries are happily spreading the costs to others.
Besides surpluses merely serve to transfer debt from public to private hands, else wise you have no growth.
Private debt is more ethical than public debt, which my kids will have to help service.
 

Gary Gutful

Post Whore
Messages
51,727
2637077cabf851447f78c57dd9e5d25f.png
 

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
41,836
Maybe not but the fact is not all debt fuels investment. Often it's just about buying votes, and the main beneficiaries are happily spreading the costs to others.

That's an argument for good vs bad debt. However it's unquestionable that all debt fuels economic activity,

Private debt is more ethical than public debt, which my kids will have to help service.

Firstly, that's simply not true, provided the economy expands debt retires it's self proportionally due to the changing value money .

Secondly, Why is it better for your kids for you to have more debt , and the government to have less, all because it taxed you more than it needed to? How is this more "ethical"?
 
Messages
11,677
Why do you like a surplus?

I mean the literal definition of a surplus is that the government taxes more money than it spends. Which means that in any given year it takes more money from taxpayers than it actually needs.

How is this a good thing?

Because they are saving for a rainy day?

Well, at present, that comes later, Gary.

Right now, we can pay down our debt. Reduce our interest payments. Give us more scope to borrow in the future if needed (or if, as we've touched on, we find a good idea that we need money for). And maybe we can put a little aside for the future, yeah.

Is it the be-all-and-end-all? No. But should we be trying to do it? Absolutely.

And so, right now, I think there are other levers we can try to pull before acquiring more debt (already discussed) but I'm ok with borrowing if we can come up with good ideas that provide a good return (already discussed).
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
150,753
Absolute pissants.

I think we need to exclude the worlds greatest treasurer, he was also a bit obsessive when it came to surplus, the others just toed the party line for mine

I dont think they cared so much but had to be seen to be cool with the idea of surplus
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,603
Didnt alot of people claim we were in a good position to handle the GFC compared to other countries because of previous years of surpluses? .... or was that just the same merkins who bang on about surpluses?
 
Top