The absence of budget emergency talk doesn't mean that one doesn't exist. We might not feel it right now but given the current global economic volatility if there were to be another GFC like event we would certainly feel it. Australia is ranked like #2 most vulnerable to a global economic shock, unlike last time this time we wouldn't have the same leverage to buy ourselves out of recession. Irelands pre GFC net debt to GDP was something like 25% and post GFC shot up over 100%.

The talk of budget emergency was a direct reaction to the sovereign risk Labor has put Australia in with their profligate spending commitments around health, education and disability and falling resources revenue, and the first budget was designed to reign in the deficit and give Australia the same pre GFC capacity to respond to external shocks. Given the political failure of that policy the new government is betting there won't be another GFC in the near future but it they get it wrong we will be up shit creek and could feasibly go the same way as Greece and Ireland or worse. It's not like we can turn to NZ to loan us money in order to pay our debts.

So the budget emergency hasn't gone away, it's still there and the current government is responding to it in a politically palatable way. Labor on the other hand would just continue to increase the deficit and keep on increasing it because their political lives depend on throwing money at health and education and buying votes. The current deficit is directly due to the fall in commodity prices failing to keep pace with Labors extravagant spending commitments around health, education and disability, which obviously Abbott /Hockey tried to fix but their reforms were blocked by the inept senate.

You are so full of it. The issue Australia had under the ALP was a collapse in revenue due to the end of the mining boom. Not "profligate spending". There was a short term increase in spending to prevent us from going into recession because of the GFC. This was excellent policy, which has been called out for praise by such pinko leftist organisations as the IMF and the World Bank.

We do not have a short term budget emergency, we never did. What we do have is a medium-long term structural deficit which could become an issue if it isn't addressed.

The simple fact is, both the ALP and the Libs have made policy changes to address the spending side of things. What is missing are some policies to address the revenue side of things. The Libs have made some good changes re superannuation. But the Negative Gearing issue is the elephant in the room that needs addressing.

Comparing us to Greece (11 million people) and Ireland (4.5 million people) is utterly ridiculous, as our economy, and taxation framework, has nothing in common with either of them. Our net govt debt is less than 20%. We have MASSIVE SCOPE to deal with any future GFC. Countries like Germany have debt levels of 80% of GDP.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Being in control of our own currency also gives us a much greater ability to manage our debts.

This :lol: If you think businesses won't sack these people so they can bring in a whole bunch of new free 'interns' you're seriously misguided. Even more so if they work at a supermarket like a Woolworths or Coles, then they will 100% be sacked at the end of the 'internship' just to save some $$$

Edited by sydneycroatia58: 5/5/2016 09:18:40 AM

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/04/youth-intern-scheme-will-exploit-workers-and-replace-real-jobs-say-unions

http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/budget-2016-without-safeguards-internship-program-risks-being-a-jobs-destruction-scheme-20160504-golt8h.html

So these PaTH positions will be for supermarkets, newsagents, cafes,etc ie basic entry level positions. Disgraceful, can see this being heavily exploited. These organisations don't need interns ffs.

what rubbish.....sacked experienced skilled people to employ unskilled, inexperienced bludgers......you have to be kidding.....there would be 1% of business willing to take crazy risks like that....](*,) ](*,) ](*,)

It might happen but I think it would be rare and isolated.

If you're in business, you are not going to dismiss someone you have already trained in order to get someone unskilled and train them all over again.

Usuallu, training someone has a cost as well. Crazy to be doing this over and over.

Why would businesses take the risk at all? $1k is nothing if you have to have someone train and supervise them.

Either:
1. They'll be stuck doing jobs like sweeping the floor that require basically no training which will give them no useful work experience or skills
2. They're looking for someone anyway so they may as well get $1k out of the government in the process

Neither creates jobs and it will likely ruin the reputation of the program amongst employers destroying its purpose for those that might actually do the right thing.

Offering relevant training and experience to young people is something all of us could get behind, whether this will work or not is highly debatable.

I think there is more on offer than $1000, i think there are milestone rewards well....................
i can't find decent applicants for electrical apprenticeships.......this year i only put on 1 apprentice as there were insufficient applicants......So many young people these days are so unemployable, due to poor attitude, low drive and motivation, elevated opinions of their worth and capabilities.......very hard to find decent people, very very few know what hard work is....heaps of flakey wimps

Mr Shorten budget reply:

Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax
Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax Spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax spend tax

But I thought the Abbott/Turnbull government are taxing Australia more than Rudd/Gillard ever did as a proportion of GDP?

Solid budget reply speech from Shorten. Exciting to hear so many policies coming from an opposition leader leading into an election.

An actual election on policies not personalities. How refreshing!

Edited by mcjules: 5/5/2016 09:51:22 PM

Solid budget reply speech from Shorten. Exciting to hear so many policies coming from an opposition leader leading into an election.

An actual election on policies not personalities. How refreshing!

Edited by mcjules: 5/5/2016 09:51:22 PM

Labor are great at making huge policy announcements. I can see people getting excited over Bill Shorten's promises but as always with the Left, the narrative is more important than fact. You can't tax your country to prosperity.

I will be voting for the Liberal Democrats for the Senate and I will be hoping for a second Senator to accompany Leyonhjelm. They seem to be the only party that genuinely aren't afraid to let people live their lives, whether they make good decisions or bad ones, and support most government policies which will reduce spending and reduced taxes.

I will be voting for the Liberals in the House of Reps as they seem to be the lesser of two evils. They have a better understanding of how businesses operate and are better economic managers but you still have to have to deal with their far Right Leaning moral crusading, which tends to bother me less the older I get.

Labor are great at making huge policy announcements. I can see people getting excited over Bill Shorten's promises but as always with the Left, the narrative is more important than fact. You can't tax your country to prosperity.

I will be voting for the Liberal Democrats for the Senate and I will be hoping for a second Senator to accompany Leyonhjelm. They seem to be the only party that genuinely aren't afraid to let people live their lives, whether they make good decisions or bad ones, and support most government policies which will reduce spending and reduced taxes.

I will be voting for the Liberals in the House of Reps as they seem to be the lesser of two evils. They have a better understanding of how businesses operate and are better economic managers but you still have to have to deal with their far Right Leaning moral crusading, which tends to bother me less the older I get.

So Shorten delivers a strong budget reply while Turnbull, Morrison & Cormann are struggling to sell their budget, interesting times ahead.

Would be good to see those colleges get the ass though.

Solid budget reply speech from Shorten. Exciting to hear so many policies coming from an opposition leader leading into an election.

An actual election on policies not personalities. How refreshing!

Edited by mcjules: 5/5/2016 09:51:22 PM

Sarcasm?

I thought it was more of an election pitch than a budget reply.