What is net spending? As opposed to gross spending? I think you're just making shit up.

The fact is spending as a percentage of GDP has always been highest under Labor. I'm not aware of any data driven measure of profligacy, such as a profligacy to GDP, or net profligacy? I think you just seized on something the IMF wrote and are treating it as if they thought the Howard government was bad, I'm sure I can find some good stuff the IMF wrote about the Howard years too.

Edited by rusty: 23/4/2014 12:14:07 AM

I don't see how they thought charging $6 for GP appointments was a good idea. All it will do is put more pressure on the lower income earners already struggling.

Yeah, sell a company with an annual revenue in excess of $5bn for 'about $4 billion'. Talk about cutting off your nose despite your face. Being that Medibank makes around $250m profit a year wouldn't the sustained income be a better option?

I was also referring to state Libs selling state assets.

-PB

Interesting test case shaping in Victoria with a private citizen funding a high Court challenge to the allegedly misleading government cost benefit analysis of the east-west tunnel.

It's not the worst thing in the world to sell Medibank, it's in a highly competitive and highly regulated market. Not having a state owned enterprise in there is unlikely to drive prices up too high as a result. However, it's only ok if they invest the money in other areas that will raise more revenue than $250m a year. I don't think building more toll roads is the best answer but this seems to be pretty much all that's on this government's mind.

We don't even know what the business case is for the project. Isn't the cost benefit 80 cents to every dollar spent anyway? It's all just one massive cock up by all involved.

The east west link is indeed an important project but the most important part of it is providing a second river crossing and alternate route to the Port of Melbourne...why the hell you would start at the Eastern end where 80% of the traffic would turn off the Eastern Freeway before they even get to the new road is beyond me. Especially when the Metro rail tunnel is ticked off by Infrastructure Australia and ready to go! Abbott should have kept to his promise and not stand in the way of Infrastructure Australia doing its job...give the money to commuter rail not a loss making road! (I acknowledge however that doing so would break another one of his promises)

Looks like the GP tax is in. Goodbye bulk billing, RIP universal health care.

http://www.news.com.au/national/treasurer-joe-hockey-warns-nothing-is-free/story-fncynjr2-1226893760263

I will wait and see until the budget is released to how I will judge all of this.

I agree with harsher means testing for welfare; too many bludgers etc

I don't agree with the GP costs etc.

-PB

Is someone able to explain to me why our government has bought these Jet planes for billions of dollars? And Tony Abbott said a previous government had set aside the funds for this purchase - which government was that?

Originally Liberals and continued under Labor. It has bipartisan agreement. Our options for new aircraft are fairly limited. We can either spend billions on old fourth generation aircraft no better than what we've currently got or we can spend billions on 5th generation aircraft to last us through till 2050. No doubt the JSF has been beset by issues but it's the best platform available to us, warts and all.

I'm so out of my depth when it comes to what we have in defence force, and what we require to have.

I'm under the impression that Mutually Assured Destruction basically governs this world in terms of potential wars, so the whole idea of continually strengthening our defence forces doesn't really make a giant amount of sense to me.

How important was spending all that money on those jets? I take all defence force related things for granted, I think, so don't fully understand why we need these jets. Is anyone able to lay it out for me?

After all said though, Newy is cheering atm - a lot more money, work, etc accompanies all the new planes being based at Williamtown.

It's just $6. A pack of cigs these days costs 3 times that. It's not about punishing the poor it's about ensuring ALL people are contributing to our universal healthcare entitlement, and encouraged to avoid unnecessary doctor visits. It's something we have to build together rather than pin on the rich, because in it's current state it's not sustainable. The poor are no worse off , they are still getting their household assistance and reduced energy bills from removing the carbon tax.

Fucking LOL

I fail to see how that is going to happen (other than election promises).

-PB

Fucking LOL is right, Labor isn't letting the government abolish the carbon tax.

So much wrong, I can't even begin to discuss it coherently.

What it will discourage is people struggling to make a living from going to the doctor to save money. This affects the low income earners a lot more than those of us who think pffft... $6.

This so much . Sadly this looks like we are heading towards the American way . Universal health care is what it is .medical care for everyone not to those who can pay .

We definitely don't need these shit box second rate lemons. The US fucked up by dropping the F22 Raptor after limited production, that thing should have been in service across Japan, Israel, Australia, England & South Korea, with the F35 replaced by an enlarged FB-22. Instead they banned it from export and then smashed the tooling so they couldn't make any more.

The F35 made sense when the budget hadn't been blown by 50% per plane, and hadn't been delayed for years.

But now it's all we can get considering our requirements to mesh with US forces.

They probably won't be in service until 2022, and will likely cost a lot more than we are supposedly paying now.



MAD is a term used for nuclear powers large enough to blow each other off the map. IE Russia vs USA, or perhaps India vs Pakistan. Australia has no real place in a discussion about MAD except for the fact that the US would likely consider an attack on Australia as an attack on the US and retaliate. But if we end up being nuked, it's likely the US is getting nuked anyway so not really much of an issue.



Supposedly 12 billion for 58, having already ordered 14 in 09.

It effectively secures regional air superiority against Indonesia, but in any conflict with China we'd be relying on US forces anyway, and any issue with Indonesia would probably end up involving the US parking a carrier group off their coast anyway.

Buying these planes is just another requirement of our US alliance.

In the end, Australia will spend trillions on other parts of the budget like welfare/age pensions, education and healthcare, so like how I see the NBN (which would have cost maybe 60 billion for a 50+ year life span), the spending here even if it reaches 100 billion is not a particularly huge part of the nations budget from now until they enter service.

$6 is too much but paying hundreds for the carbon tax isn't ? Got to admire labour logic

In 16 years time when we're at the financial break-even point from selling Medibank (probably sooner with a growing population) what do we do for money then? Just sell another government asset? So in 2050 when there's no more government assets left and the whole country is privatised exactly how much are we going to be paying in tax in order to fund this country's infrastructure?

It still looks really bad that they're going "pension age is going up to reduce pension costs" and then a week later the $24bn being spent on these fighter planes hits the front pages (which is not a coincidence no doubt).

How old are you? If you are in a low Income job $6 every time you visit a gp adds up . This is targeting the elderly and the sickly.

For me $6 is fine but for lower income earners or people with chronic conditions that require regular visits then it becomes an issue. At least the carbon tax had a rebate for those that it affected the most. If their planning to do that, I don't mind so much.

Also, what's to stop them increasing it to $10 then $20 then $40...?

My mother in law will be affected by this . She had kidney failure but somehow survived but she has to see her gp and specialists every week . A 6 dollar payment will eat up her pension

In 16 years time when we're at the financial break-even point from selling Medibank (probably sooner with a growing population) what do we do for money then? Just sell another government asset? So in 2050 when there's no more government assets left and the whole country is privatised exactly how much are we going to be paying in tax in order to fund this country's infrastructure?[/quote]
The point is, they can't just take the $4 billion off the bottom line. They have to invest in other infrastructure projects that will return them more than $250 million a year through taxes and other levies. If they do that correctly it's fine. I don't trust these guys to do the right thing though. The libs being better economic managers is a massive fallacy.

If she's on a pension she's exempt from the $6 levy.

I hope so , she is already struggling as it is .

Low income workers don't pay bills now ? Have I missed something ? 10% rises in gas & electricity bills effects everyone and will rise year on year